Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop

Although I have enjoyed the bashing of MS for the last 2 years due to Vista, it did actually have real problems.

1. The OS was built around DRM which puts the the user thirds to MS and the movie companies.

2. They wanted to improve the 'running as admin' problem, but they didn't have the guts to actually make normal users in to non-admin users.

Have either of these things changed?

I too have tried out the beta of Windows Vista and although it is somewhat better than Vista - it still suffers from:

* Very high RAM usage (about 2/3 that of Vista)
* Heavy UI requirements (and no classic start bar now)
* Heavy handed usage of DRM
* Lack of device support (as bad as Vista)
* Unknown cost (although Microsoft need to support their staff with this)
* IE8 is an abysmal web browser

The bottom line is that Windows 7 is based on the Vista core (with slightly more polish) but is still horrendously memory hungry, GPU intensive, (probably) expensive and the same quality control that we have come to expect from Microsoft ;) Don't forget also that Microsoft is planning to move over to a software-as-a-subscription model (so you will have to PAY every year to keep your PC working).

No thanks!

Sadly people are so brainwashed these days that Windows (whether 95, 98, XP, Vista, Windows 7 etc) is the only choice but there really are other choices now. You don't have to pay the Microsoft (or Apple) tax any more - you really can have legal and quality software for free and more and more people are discovering this.

No this won't kill Linux on the desktop and neither will it kill Apple OS/X either.

Those people who are brand new to computing will probably still buy Vista/Windows 7 (although usage of Linux based netbooks is increasing). Those of us who THINK and CARE about efficient/non-power-hungry hardware, freedom of use (and licensing), truly secure systems and open technologies will continue to use better software than Microsoft's.

Pretending to be a *former* fan of something (e.g. Ubuntu) and then saying *but I found something better* is a well known trick of Microsoft followers.

You may be completely genuine - in which case I fully support you right to CHOICE and hope you enjoy your copy of Windows 7. Me I also enjoy my right to choice and will be sticking with 64 bit Ubuntu thank you very much.

Microsoft sold Vista as the latest greatest thing. It sucked big time.

Now comes son of Vista and the only thing good you can say about it is it isn't as bad as Vista!

As for comparison with Ubuntu and OS X, wait until Win7 SP1 ships then compare.

I, for one, have had enough Microsoft crap to last a lifetime. Good news for those who make their living from tech support though :-)

Windows 7 looks nice and I am under the impression works well. But nothing M$ will ever do will kill Linux on the Desktop. If you believe that then you are not thinking rationally. Yes there will be some who may switch back, absolutely. However more then likely people who used linux in the past will probably continue to use linux. For many linux users, windows never went away but was sidelined. I am actually surprised by this article. Look at how far Desktops (Window Managers) have come in Linux world over the last few years. M$ did what M$ does best. If looks at where the trends are and adopts it, then tries to own it. M$ is trying to adopt the look of Apple's OS X desktop and the Window Managers of *nixes because people like it. But M$ still carry the fatal flaws of previous Windows and that will continue to M$ detriment. Linux and other *nixes will never really go away as long as people are willing to support the FOSS movement.

As always, 7 will probably do well because the average punter will (a) have NO CHOICE about whether they buy it, and (b) will not know how to set about replacing it. If punters had a genuine choice they might well choose not to buy it.

I'm a six-fingered typist (type properly with the left hand, hunt and peck with the right). I want a netbook with a decent keyboard, which means a 10" screen, which means I have to pay for XP :-( Or I have to pay extra for a small SSD when I actually want a large hard drive. Why can't I get the combination of linux, a decent keyboard and a hard drive? If I wanted XP the other two come with it!

Cheers,
Wol

You make the bold claim, "Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop" without substantaiting it. No benchmarks, no stabiity tests, no feature comparisons.

People have been cheated by M$ for decades. All anyone wants is a stable system that provides a GUI and high-level access to hardware for applications. Instead, we have gigabytes of garbage on our hard disks and in our RAM.

Since M$ are know to have been selling a proven failure (Vista), would it not be reasonable to wait until Windows 7 ships then do a soak test then compare it with Linux and OSX? Instead, you make unsubstantiated claims and look like an idiot.

Get another job, mate: you're certainly hopeless at critical analysis.

If you are so annoyed that you cant buy a Linux box why not build your own?

Any self-respecting geek will be able to do one? Can u?

Working for an IT support company, the most common problems we get with Vista are:

1. High system requirements
2. Less device drivers for older hardware
3. DRM incompatibilities
4. Illogical UI changes compared to XP

Your "view" of Win7 beta doesn't address any of those issues apart from anecdotal comments.

Hard evidence is needed, and I've seen none of it so far.

Your article failed to give me any reason why I should buy Windows instead of using Linux.

I wonder if all the people complaining about Vista being slow tested it on old hard drives/slow hardware.

I have no issues with speed.
but then i do run vista ultimate x64 on
an Athlon 64 X2 6000
8GB PC2 6400
and 2X 320GB 7200 SATA 2 drives in Raid 0

I'd imagine that if people test windows 7 on hardware they have had for several years they'll complain it's slow.

Test a 2009/10 OS on 2009 hardware, not 2003. Same with Vista stick it on a dual core system with a minimum of 2GB ram 32bit, and 4GB ram 64bit, and a 7200rpm sata 2 hdd, and it is not slow

You all have WAY too much time on your hands to have these religious arguments every few months... Windows 7 is actually quite nice, went in perfectly onto my test system, most of the crazy DRM stuff is gone, and it looks nicer than Gnome and KDE.

My Ubunutu machine is pretty much a paperweight for web browsing, while Windows 7 just worked. No smb.conf editing, no screen resolution disasters, no bluetooth hangs, no problems at all.

While microsoft has done lots of SUPER dumb things, your linux jihad is just plain moronic.... its not mature, its not rational, it doesn't work half the time, it crashes plenty, and linux people are 50 times more ARROGANT than microsoft ever was. Go away and hide under a rock

If you ask me - Ubuntu looses even against XP.
It might be one of the most popular Linuxes (best advertising and distribution system so far) but it is hardly the most userfriendly and eyecatching distro out there. In fact I know many users that ran away from it as it gets bloated and very unfriendly faster than Vista (provided you're not a techie ofc.) Ever tried Ubuntu on an ASUS laptop? Please give me a break...
If you want a fair comparison against the new beta OS - you should compare it with the latest & greatest from the Linux world. Or at least with those distros that are less painfull for the newbies and provide slicker GUI (or better hardware support). Maybe SuSe, Mandriva, PCLinux... Just a tought.
If I'm to weight pros and cons of the both camps - I'd rather choose a decent theme of KDE4 with Compiz, then go pretending Windows 7 has a great visual look. Yes they're still unstable/unfinished but so is the 7th.
Then there is the flip side of the coin - if you want gaming, well you can't go without Windows. Or you might subscribe for Cedega (but it seems they're as greedy as M$) which is even worse...

So basically the author is saying that Windows 7 is just good enough for running open-source software? ...a bit slower than Linux. And that it the sole reason for getting Win 7?

Sorry but I prefer not to give a single $ to Microsoft and run all those apps on GNU/Linux, whose kernel is much more polished.

You realize there are a number of other distros besides Ubuntu, right? Even entire different desktops (the top layer), such as my personal preference KDE.

KDE 4 is looking better than anything any other OS has to offer...still needs a bit of work, but has been rewritten (something old Microsoft never does) and thus has a beautiful API to develop on.

And of course you still can't beat the price.

The only reasons Windows exists is because everyone is forced to buy it on pre-builts...it has been a peice of .... for years and anyone with technical knowledge knew that, but unlike other industries (due to monopoly) it rained supreme.

Lastly I have no idea why it has advantages for open source?? I develop open source and 90+% of my tools are built in (and originate on) to linux. Runs likea charm and looks just as good as anything MS has to offer.

MS will still hide all the functionality from users since they consider the average joe ... dumb ... which is especially horrible for power users....

The security flaws in the system have never been truly addressed since it is a basic flaw in Windows oversized kernel which places too many things inside the root-area. That can only be fixed with a major rewrite...but why would MS do that when all people care about is the look-n-feel (plus that is comes on the computer when they buy it...no choice).

So, any good intentioned soul sitting down to read this article might actually believe that it is written by the Linux fan who is re-evaluating his decision to run Linux instead of a MS product. Why? Because Windows 7 BETA is just that good right? No. Because like so many MS Fanboys, he is a farce, long on words, but short on evidence. As has been stated before, there is no evidence in this article to support the author's claims. Anyone who would attempt a test between a BETA product and an established product expecting the results to be certifiable is obviously living in LaLa land anyways. Seriously, where did this guy get his credentials?

As to the person complaining Linux laptops, quit skimping on your purchases and you might actually find a laptop with everything you need and a decent distro of Linux on it. Those ASUS/No Name $299.00 netbooks are gonna suck, it's called, you get what you pay for. Duh.

Thanks,

I Know More.. Apparently

Windows 7 is nothing more than a "service pack" for VISTA and should really be issued as such.
It will never replace Ubuntu. When I can take the same distro of Ubuntu and install it on old or new laptops, desktops or even create servers, then Microsnot has a long way to go.

Sorry, Windows 7 is nothing more than a service pack.

I bought a Mac because Vista was horrible to use. The alternative was Linux but I could afford the Mercedes so why would I go for the Scoda?

I have been using Linux for servers since 1994. Every few years I give it another try on the desktop and am invariably disappointed. It has lots of gee-wizz graphics now but the interaction design is still awful.

Why haven't they gotten any better? Linux works in a very limited way and the average user is not going to understand or accept those limitations......2000 and 2000 II (XP) were good OS's. Microsoft is capable of doing some things right.

Open Office is fine but can't compare with MS Office for most users and even on a Mac MS Office is still the best suite.

I don't like Microsoft but give credit where they deserve it........if Linux could evolve beyond staying at such a basic level of usage then there would be a change...this has not yet happened.

I agree with Mikko; for such a provocative title, you didn't do any comparison with Linux at all.

Windows is a convenient OS for training monkeys to eventually type Shakespeare.

I won't be switching back to Windows until they develop an OS that:

Respects that I am smart enough to want to do what I say I want, not just the most popular options.

Doesn't give every third-party script the right to run as admin (security shouldn't depend on only the AV and firewall, kids.)

Doesn't spy on me, doesn't get all Big Brother on me (yes, I made that DVD myself I don't need DRM blocking me), and doesn't try to do ANYTHING behind my back, even if I haven't chosen to upgrade something.

Adheres to standards, rather than developing a new and special (ed) version of them. Once the Vole decided he had invented the English language and could sell it, what chance was there for true compatibility in anything?

Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop ... bold. Lets not even get into how Linux is not even technically ON the desktop at all (it is a kernel, not an operating system), so does it win by default? ... K not gonna touch that one...

I beta tested Vista, and had run it on a new purchased machine. Had no problems that were of microsofts fault. Most of the problems were finding 64 bit drivers for random things such as a webcam or a wifi card. Although the UAC, was annoying! But if one were to expect anything in a beta test to run smoothly they would be pretty ignorant.

I have since moved onto a few of the linux flavors. Testing each with their flaws and weaknesses. I've went through about 9 different distributions which run on the Linux kernel. Seeing what worked, what didn't work, what programs to use, and which not to use. What it all comes down to is user preference.

I am running Windows 7 currently inside of Virtual Box under Ubuntu Ibex. Considering this is Virtual Machine, Windows 7 beta runs very smoothly. Better than Vista did in it's beta testing.

What the final verdict is, am I willing to spend another few hundred bucks everytime Microsoft releases their latest and greatest. That answer is absolutely not. What if i wanna buy a new CPU, and use the same version of Windows that I have, not allowed to ?!?! Surely, I purchased this product, just months ago, and now I am not legally allowed to run it on my machine because of a CPU failure, which resulted in the purchase of a new chip.

I will though be able to continue to use my existing version of whichever flavor of Linux I choose to, and for free, no matter what kind of hardware changes I make, or how many installs I do...

As I type this up on my work Computer running XP, I laugh. Linux is my choice at home, I use XP at my place of employment. All of these OS's get the job done, all have their strengths and weaknesses. Oh well, it's just a computer, what does it really matter! Right ?!

What are you talking about? I keep seeing articles with titles like this.

Linux on the desktop is used by people who want to be using Linux. When I use Windows (I have a notebook with a dual boot to Vista) I'm amazed at how some things are easy, some things are a huge pain,and other (more complex) tasks are impossible. For me, Windows is incredibly limited, and lacks most of my favorite software. There's no way a new version of Windows is changing any of the reasons I use Linux.

When You choose fresh install or upgrade existing o/s partition, Upgrade could cause bit O' Problems. If you have 10 partitions, windows 7 will install on ALL of those Partitions, Probably impossible to remove, old files, file 7 made, is empty.(Although install appears like old in most Hijacked partitions) Fresh install is easily removeable. Also, install takes 10 Gb of Hdd space, so it figures 16 Gb of Memory offer far superior performance. Drashek

Just as well, I like being able to use a crossover cable that allows both computers on either side of it to access the network properly without people telling me I should buy a splitter or another hub instead. :awesomeface:

Seriously, that's the ONE thing that stopped me from using Linux Mint, which is otherwise a lovely OS.

This is a pretty arrogant article considering there really isn't enough under the hood to make XP users change. Compete with Mac? Compete with Linux? Oh come on, since when did these users EVER worry about Microsoft?

More business did not make the fatal jump to Vista because of the hardware requirements. Granted you can pick up a 2gb stick of ram for $10 now. Most of the other components are still a premium. Big OEMS like Dell, HP, etc are loathe to offer lots of bargain built machines because they have to load up with a percentage of lastest generation parts in order to make their margins. Even if they did decide to make the jump, big business still cannot buy the OS and load it onto existing machines. The machines not puchased in the last 2 years would have to be replaced as well.

About the comment above on Linux not getting it together, really, the pace of change and progress is astounding. The list of show stoppers for the non-technically inclined has mostly dwindled to hardware drivers. Then there is the zero cost per OS copy.

Lastly, here is something to think about. Say Win7 sucks the least of all Microsofts previous OS's. Think they will continue to innovate? Think the malware,trojan, worm writers are just goingt to pack it in? My bet is that MS will just sit back for 5-7 years and collect $$$ while locking everyone into Win7 and letting their OS go to crap again. Meanwhile Linux will continue to innovate and outpace the competition.

Sorry, Thanks, but no thanks. Had enough of that crap.

Ok so the title of this article "Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop" is a little attention grabbing and a slight exaggeration. The article itself is thin on detail, but I think is a fair summation of Win7. If you need benchmarks & statistics there's plenty of other reports out there. The points remain though, Win7 solves most of the problems with the sluggish Vista. It improves the look, makes things easier and generally is the OS they should have releases instead of Vista. But would it be as good if they hadn't failed so spectactularly as they did with Vista and seen their competitors gaining on them? Most likely not and we'd have seen another bloatfest. MS are after so many years finally learning and are almost acting like a fresh startup, than an old goat. Win7 won't kill Linux, it won't stop OS/X but I think most people on XP will be happy to move to Win7, Vista users (if they get a cheap upgrade option) will as well, and those people struggling with Linux (but telling themselves it is better cos it's open source & free) will realise that a free meal comes with a cost. Come on is $120 really all that hard to swallow? As for OS/X, it's got less to merit its cost now and it'll come down to matter of preference (or the fact there's way more software/games for MS's offering).

Anyway, I want to address the rhetoric of John Cockroft "I don't think so :)", cos frankly you're lost in cloud penguin land. As I say free is not always better. Your points.
* High RAM usage: It needs 1GB to run, these days that costs nothing and has been the minimum spec on even the cheapest of machines for over 2 years. It also uses all the available RAM to preload and make things run more efficiently, so if you have 2, 4, etc GB on your system you see real benefits.
* Heavy UI req's: It runs fast with 1GB of RAM, and at the same time looks good. It was fair to say that about Vista, Win7 has streamlined and it shows.
* DRM is out of MS's hands. That said, I buy my CDs, burn it to disk and have no idea what the whole DRM fuss is about as I can move my music onto any device I've ever wanted to.
* IE8: I've had it crash on me too often, but it is an early beta. But speed wise and feature wise they've finally caught up and I'd say it was faster than Fox or Chrome. It still needs the Fox plugins, but how you can call it abysmal I don't know - you have obviously not tried it.
I won't even try to address the rest of your rant - you will obviously never listen. Struggle along with Linux if it gives you such a thrill. The rest of us can put Vista behind us and enjoy Win7 now that MS has turned the corner and have become an innovative company again.

for a desktop computer to browse the web, type and play multi-media, you have a serious infection of malware.

GNU/Linux can do as well or better on much less equipment. If you have that kind of money to burn you are better off buying extra seats to let the wife and kids surf too.

If MS OS 7 still runs registy keys, needs defragging, and startup cleanup it is worthless (or more maturly stated has a built in annuity). I cant get behind a product with a intended lif-limit, when Linux is free and works. Further, this article just reeks of bias. just read the otehr comments. I dont have time to nit pick this journalists ignorance and BS.

What is wrong with everyone ? Windows 7 is nothing but Vista with a new taskbar (oOOooh!) and with the constant nagging/permissions fixed ! Ever since the announcement of the beta release, I've been trying to find more documentation on the new features.... and guess what, this is what I found ! No new micro-kernel, no new filesystem, no fancy backup system... NOTHING !

Oh wait... I forgot the part where the windows become transparent except for the ouline. My bad. Pretty impressive indeed </sarcasm

What is wrong with everyone ? Windows 7 is nothing but Vista with a new taskbar (oOOooh!) and with the constant nagging/permissions fixed ! Ever since the announcement of the beta release, I've been trying to find more documentation on the new features.... and guess what, this is what I found ! No new micro-kernel, no new filesystem, no fancy backup system... NOTHING !

Oh wait... I forgot the part where the windows become transparent except for the ouline. My bad. Pretty impressive indeed </sarcasm

"Windows 7" is just a service pack of Vista. Microsoft just changed the name to leave all the Vista baggage behind. As far as Windows keeping it's marketshare, the writing is on the wall. They closed proprietary model is losing steam and the open source juggernaut will prevail. Why? Because while Microsoft has some talented people working in Redmond, Linux has the entire world working on its open operating system. It's just a matter of time. Nice try though...

Windows 7, like all Windows products, will be very expensive.

Normal security won't work on it (McAfee products don't work on it currently).

You will have to buy updates for every bit of software and hardware so that they can be compatible with Windows 7.

Then, as with Vista, you will have to slowly discover which components Microsoft has decided to take out, limit, or restrict from your one of 18 different versions of Windows 7 --

Home Ghetto Version, Home Middle Class version, Home Lake Washington Version

Small Business Entrepeneur Version, Small Business Wannabe Version, Small Business Crippled Server Version, and Small Business with Microsoft Bank Account version

Media Center Compuserve version, Media Center AOL version, Media Center AOL-with-limited-crapware version, Media Center with the usual Linux open source freeware included (top of the line)

Then there will be the Windows 7 Ultimate version, called "Windows 7 cloud 9 version" -- allows you to virtualize Linux (and Apple, too!) so you can run all those free open source Linux programs and forget that you're running Windows!

All you need is a 4 Terabyte RAM machine, with 160 Pentabyte hardrive for the Windows OS (with 10 Gb reserved for Linux).

The Windows 7 logo is a really, really fat woman singing.

Win 7 is Vista's final release that it suppose to be. After so many companies still running XP and Microsoft wants to finish its support.

I always see the comments that Vista is 'broken' or 'incomplete' and that this, that, or the other thing doesn't work with Vista and the blame for those things falls on Microsoft. I have to ask... why? Do people not realize that Microsoft is not a PC hardware manufacturer? They are a SOFTWARE manufacturer (in the PC world, I am aware of the X-Box, Zune, yadda yadda). When Microsoft makes an OS they have to make it for such a HUGE and DIVERSE hardware market that of COURSE some things will not work, not matter when they develop and release a new OS. It is the HARDWARE manufacturers responsibility to ensure they develop drivers for their products that work with whatever OS they want their hardware to run on. Blaming Microsoft because nVidia or Creative Labs doesn't have a driver for Vista for their hardware is like blaming a grocery store because you bought quality ingredients to make a three course meal but you can't cook worth a damn. Is it the store's fault you don't know how to read a recipe or how long to cook a roast so it isn't a dried out piece of shoe leather? I don't think so. That is part of what gives Apple such a good image. They have such a tight fist on hardware, of course it is going to look like their OS works much better then Windows. They don't have to attempt to support who knows how many different pieces of third-party hardware that anyone can develop for their OS. They decide what hardware their OS is going onto. And I am not bashing Apple or praising Microsoft with those statements, simply adding what should be some common perceptions of the two OS's and the companies who release them.

I'd never say anyone HAS to like Microsoft products, or Apple, or Linux, or anything else. All of them DO have flaws that are attributable to the parent company. But if you're going to complain about something at least do the tiniest bit of research to find out where the blame actually lies, or know enough about the company and/or product to know what it is they are actually making and who are the ones not supporting an OS.

I don't even need to give a full explaination for everybody to agree with me, but if you want to convince Linux users to use Windoze then you have to do more than just come up with a bold title. This article doesn't even have anything really to do with Linux OSes, you just present that "Windose is easy to use!". Maybe Windoze 7 sucks so much that thats the only thing you can present in an article that makes Windoze better than Linux. Linux users don't use Linux for ease of use, so your attempt at convincing how great Windoze 7 is to Linux users is a complete phailure. And for most Linux users, to do what they want to do on windoze is nearly impossible. If I were in that position i would wonder things like:
Lets see is there a way to make my settings portable? Why do i always have to wait hours and hours to do this "defrag" thing? You mean it takes hours and lots of money to change my GUI? I have to pay hundreds of dollars every couple years to stay up-to-date? Why can't i copy with my middle mouse button? I got a virus 5 minutes after loading windows! How the hell do i recompile this program? How do i even begin recompiling the OS! I cant believe i have to restart even time i install thanks for this stupid registry! Where are all my virtual desktops? Why can i not uninstall any of these programs, they won't get off my system after i click the uninstall button!
I could go on forever. This makes me wonder how to people even live with their computer. You can't even uninstall most programs from your system! Maybe office rage really comes from using windoze.

Hello there,

It does state 'somewhere' i think its on technet or on one fo the 2 pages that they recommend you read whilst downoading windows 7 beta, that the IE8 in windows 7 is at a different development stage than to other OS flavours.

some things i have found that i dont like, 1 which is already mentioned above, unable to change to classic start menu. The theme can be changed to the classic colours an boxy look (also if you go in to safe mode) but the start menu cannot seem to be changed, at least not now anyway.

cant disable fast user switching, although with poking around group policies you can force people to input a username and a password, so potential hackers dont already have 1/2 their work cut out for them.

and i've managed to break it trying to install creative xfi extreme audio sound card drivers, luckily the onboard soundcard worked after being turned on in the bios and an automatic update.

cant see it being a linux killer though.

I have been a devoted Linux fan for the past several years. I even run the local Linux Users Group in my community.

Your review on Windows 7 has proven to me that Windows is a much better product than any distribution of Linux could ever be.

I hope you continue to provide inspiration to us all.

A new devoted follower of Microsoft,

Robert

Before coming out with the same old DRM, BSOD, slow, unintuitive arguments you should try the beta yourself. Dump it on a free partition, don't use a VM. It really is LOTS better. It's as if MS feel threatened and actually pulled their finger out.

7 is not strong enough to kill Linux on my desktops. I want an OS that works for me, not the WIPO mob, and one that has no EULA telling me what I can and cannot do with my own software. I'll run the wheels off my remaining XP boxes and migrate them all to FOSS as the XP stuff becomes unsupportable. I'm 2 for 5 now.

I loaded Win7 Beta on an Intel desktop board (DG35EC) with a E2200 CPU, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics, and 250GB SATA HD last night, and the installation was the easiest, and quickest, I've ever experienced with an OS - even quicker than Ubuntu. It ran fine on this relatively low powered system.

That said, it's still too resource-demanding for my tastes. I don't need eye candy, either on Windows, OS X, or Linux. I use a computer for business tasks, and some home/family work. What effectively drives the OS I use is not the OS itself, but all of the peripherals connected to the computer. If Linux offered drivers for a number of scanners, multi-function printers, etc. I use, I'd drop WinXP in a heartbeat. But, it doesn't - and, of course, that's the primary responsibility of the peripheral manufacturer.

There will always be Linux on the desktop, just as their will be OS X on graphic designers desktops. No matter what MS does, they will never be able to convert the Linux geeks, or the Mac faithful.

This has to be one of the stupidest reviews that I have seen. I don't believe for a second that the author has spent more than 10 minutes using ubuntu or any other up to date linux distro.

There are a number of places that are selling Linux desktop systems for those that are familiar with search engines. Geez, you can even install virtualbox and run the microcrap OS inside of Linux if you want to. Oh yeah, virtualbox along with Linux is free so reviewer's shouldn't be expecting to get a payoff from microcrap for saying anything nice about it.

Is it just me or everyone who has ever complained about the power/memory hungry OS are the people with 10 year old computers? I understand spending $70 for 4GB is way too expensive of an upgrade these days or another $70 for a dualcore CPU. Try running XP on 486 with 2MB Ram for a change, see if that will enlighten you.

Windows 7 has severe driver problems, especially sound drivers. An operating system, in a multimedia world, that can't do multimedia? Yeah, that's a "real" threat!

i don't see why the writter keep using " Internet Exploder" while there are many options: why don't you leave Windows if you don't like it?!

you've been paid off

if you want to play games... buy a toy, if you need to work buy a tool

you are a tool, but i will still buy mac

After 14 heartbreaking years with Windows, during which I spent untold hours reinstalling, reconfiguring, and recovering data, I moved to the Mac in October, and I am SO relieved to be out from under that horrible operating system. It's too late for Microsoft to try and lure me back. Way too late.

This article is so wrong, I don't even know where to begin. The author knows nothing about computers and is a Microsoft fan boy in disguise.

You don't understand the point of Linux, do you? I guess Windows 7 is enough to make some people who don't understand the point of Linux, like you, go back to Windows, and maybe slow the influx a little. But it's not going to kill Linux on the desktop.

Windows 7 is still going to cost a lot more than Ubuntu. Windows 7 will still be the opposite of software freedom. For most of the people who are dedicated Linux users, it's not about a shinier user interface or a somewhat leaner system. It's about freedom. That's something that Windows will always be sadly lacking.

Not only that, in Linux, you can make your desktop as shiny and customized as you want.

Its very interesting story. Windows 7 comparing to apple. And heading is funny. Normally this is to attract masses from the web. I too was trapped to this article. Like a honey spot. Dont waste time on this article and dont trust this publisher.

Obviously the majority of you commenting here dont see what this article is, its his opinion of Windows 7. I personally have been an avid linux user since 1996 and currently have windows 7 installed on a spare machine, just because i wanted to see what the new product was like. I dont forsee me or my wife moving from our comfy world of Slackware and Ubuntu, but at least they figured out a few things for this new version of the OS. As far as OS X goes, if it was really so great, and so fast, and so reliable, why did it abandon the only true platform that could run it correctly for the universal platform. OS X is just *nix on steroids, with nothing special to separate it from the herd anymore. Also, the newer version os OSX have limited hardware support for their newly claimed platform. basically, this is all opinion. Stop hammering the write of the article for stating how he feels about Windows 7. If you dont want to try it, or dont think its worth anything, then dont.

.....then congrats - it wins.
I too downloaded Windows 7 and stuck it on a dual core box, 3GB RAM and a fast SATA drive graphics card etc.
It is an absolute dog. Yes - it boots about half a nanosecond quicker than Vista - I am not someone who really moans that much about bootspeed. I've never had to as I have a Macbook so never have to turn the thing off.
Running applications on this thing such as MS Office, Open Office and (yes I know it's a beta) games varied from me thinking that it had forgotten I had clicked on it to it hard locking up and needing the magic power button press. Once again Microshaft have gone for the 'fluffy look' way of thinking which hogs resources like you would not believe. For me to have it just sitting there doing (literally) nothing took 800Mb of RAM - nothing in the list of processes but just 'I am using 800Mb of RAM so there'. As with Vista, all they have done is move stuff around so that you spend time looking for it and still then cannot find it. To suggest this is going to make people change their OS of choice is utter garbage. I will not be moving away from Ubuntu and Mac OS - I kind of like it where if an app hangs it doesn't take the whole box with it, call me old fashioned if you will....

I found myself giggling when I read that "Windows 7 complained about being under powered with 2 GB of RAM." My main Linux box running Slackware 12.2 screams with 2 GB of RAM:)
Claiming to be a linux fan boy after running Ubuntu/XP for three years doesn't hold a lot of water. That is, you don't know enough about Linux/Unix to write off the OS.
Get used to it. Linux/Unix is here to stay.

One would think that taking the time to do all this testing would inspire one to take the time to SPELL CHECK the article before posting. Seriously, hard to take you seriously if you can't spell "realize." Moron.

As long as platform-specific apps are slanted to windows, linux and Mac are going to have a tough time getting the upper hand. I work in Medical IT and the apps we use for Electronic Medical Records, Radiology , patient tracking, etc. just do not work outside of windows, and the other OS's do not command enough market share to force these chaps to switch programmers. If I recall correctly, Apple has no intention of adding business as a target market; "if what we do fits your needs, great, but...". OSS should do more research how they can gain a foothold in industries like healthcare so they can win hearts and minds, else M$ is it for the forseeable future.

Hey all,

there is not chance in hell that this ninkumpoop is the genuine article. He is either a) quite possibly the stupidist person on the face of the planet, or b) Steve Ballmer; in which case point a) very much applies.

M$hite will never beat Linux, any flavour, because Linux is more then an OS, it's a philosophy, a form of digital freedom where we are allowed to DO WHAT WE WANT with no sneaky M$hite being conducted behind our backs.

I saw the keynote speach on 7 and the only thing they could highlight was the new task bar, which is Apples, and the ability to create a media network, which has been possible for YEARS.

Anyway, to summarise Win7 - a gold plated turd is still a turd.

oh ye , i cant remember the poster who mentioned that linux has issues running on things like the Asus netbook, eg 1000h. it does, and i use one regularly with no issues (Ibex), but i understand that the earlier models may have issues with their hardware limitations.

While posts like these tend to attract die hard fans of one OS or another, I think most average people (sorry tech junkies) just want a computer that works well withouth their having to understand why or how it works well. Nearly everyone's job (or work at home) goes much more smoothly when a computer is a useful tool rather than a source of frustration. Microsoft has done a masterful job of selling it's products as the "only" solution out there. As consumers realize they have been lied to, some will leave the flock. But let's face it, others will stay because they are comfortable and because they fear they cannot learn how to use another OS. Microsoft could put out thee OS's as poor as Vista and STILL be the dominant OS in the world. People think you have to be a tech guru to use Linux (not true) or that Apple computers are overpriced compared to their PC counterparts (probably not true either when all factors are weighed). As someone who has computers at home running Linux, a Macbook and an iMac running Leopard (not the best upgrade by the way) and am currently typing this on Vista, it's easy for me to see the pros and cons of each. I also see that it boils down to a matter of taste and comfort level for the user. Write an article giving the real pro's and con's of each OS and let people know that no OS will perform the way it is supposed to perform on an older machine. Microsoft OS's are greedy and need more space and speed but Vista certainly runs better on a newer computer than Leopard will on a non-Intel dual core Mac. No new OS will save out of date hardware, in fact an older machine is probably better off running the old OS. So for the vast majority of real people out there, they should keep their old OS until they decide to upgrade their computers. Then their decision to upgrade should be based on many factors (hardware, speed, ease of use, what they are using their computers for, etc) and not just on what OS is getting good reviews or which computer looks cooler which doing web search at Starbucks.

"Anyway I installed the 64 bit version of Windows 7 on my Phenom 9350e, quad core based machine with 2GB of very fast RAM"

1) How did the 64_bit Windows-7 MSOS benefited from 2GB of RAM?

2) Why use 64_bit OS with 2 GB of RAM?

3) And finally, what Microsoft's XP, Vista or Windows-7 GUI desktops have to do with Gnome or KDE? Have you ever REALLY utilized various Open-GL/GUI features and tools, under X with Gnome or KDE desktops?

That's it? It doesn't suck as bad as Vista? Another article penned by a Micro-shill.

I have worked with Win 7 on several machines. I did not limit myself to just one high-end system. At this point in the economy people do not want to but a new system, they want the one that they have to run better.
So we tested on a Dell Latitude D510 , D600, Optiplex 330 and Optiplex 170L.

On all machines win 7 ran slower than XP. The optiplex being some what better of a macine showed NO improvement on clocked applications and in fact.. the disk accessing was slower.

I understand that the technology must move forward. But what do we do with the people who do not have the resources and/or money to purchace a new system? Leave them behind? Microsoft has a very bad habbit of trying to force the markets to do what they want.. but not this time.. just say no.. again.. Oh.. and testing it on one high-end system.. shows you are not the reporter you make yourself out to be.

Ok there is one thing that everyone is forgetting about. As we get more and more advanced in our os's of course they are gonna take more and more memory.
If you complain about how vista is a system hog, Think about upgrading your system away from the 5 year old relic sitting under your desk and buying something new. I build my own system and i use 3 different os's i have vista, xp pro, and umbuntu. Each has there own uses but for the average user vista is fine and better in a lot of aspects because it has much better security than even xp with sp3, and for those that are using a 300 dollar discount system from walmart. theres a reason it runs slow, you bought your system FROM WALMART. SO DONT EXPECT TO RUN LIKE A GAMERS MACHINE

Windows 7 on purchased PC's is no more a tax than Apple "hardware tax". You don't _have_ to buy a PC with Windows 7 on it, there are other choices. If you buy from a major vendor, that's your choice and you do. You're vote is with your money.

I myself, will be purchasing Windows 7.

The title is very misleading. The list of problems and shortcomings of MS7 fills the article. Ubuntu is only one of the Linux’s and is known to be slower than the rest of the distributions. The author did not provide hard data to substantiate his subjective evaluation. Just more FUD. If this is an example of analytical objective writing in the Inquirer it's no wonder that the rag has the journalistic standing that it has maintained....

The only attractive thing about this article is its title, otherwise its total waste of time.

I agree with Andrew. If you actually ran Vista (now - Sp1) on a recent machine you would'nt have any problems.

I still don't get why Apple gets a free ride with this? Has anyone tried running leopard on a G4?

As much as you want to hate MS - Vista is fine. Now.

"kill Linux on the desktop"?

Lol, in your dreams. Anyone gushing like this about a *beta* product is either a Microsoft fanboy or a paid shill. Or both.

Wow Nick,

Good article. I think it shows maturity and a real love of tech. After all, don't we all want the best, nicest, shineyest (??) stuff, including OS? Regardless of who makes it really.

Unfortunately it now looks like the hate-squad are going to lynch you. That's what I call brave ;)

Yeah, is Windows 7 open source? No. Is it RAM and processor heavy? Yes. Does it have a super fast file system like Ubuntu 9.04 is going to have? No. Among many other categories, I am sure its just the latest failure from Microsoft. Lastly, when I give my opinion, I dont assume other products are going to die, as if I was some sort of guru. Loser.

Is this gentleman a moron or an agent of MicroScum Inc. I don't know for sure as at first he sounded like he knew something but his comment of "it seems that Windows 7 leans on the hard-drive in a way that Microsoft has not made public" is proof that this person has no idea what he is talking about as Yes XP VISTA & UBUNTU use swap space etc and need to utilize your hard drive at all times, so that was the line that said it all to me as I am sure all techies here can relize the stupidness of that statement.

I use Ubuntu 32Bit all the time for almost everything, except games of course since cedega and wine are complicated options which are not close to 100% solutions, this is not linux's fault since MS has a monopoly with directX technology needed for 90%+ of games today. Why is the USA government not looking into this as a game platform monopoly is just more proof that our government is just corrupt bunch of scumbuckets ( Obama is not your savior he is only a puppet with a different jingle). Ubuntu is an awesome OS and has served me well for almost a year now, it can be configured to make Vista look like garbage ( you should see peoples faces when I spin my 3d cube or paint with fire on the screen and they are stuck wondering why their windows always seems to be conecting to the internet all the time, LOL.

You have a choice sheeple either role with MS who could give less than a shite about you or join the Ubuntu forums and install Ubuntu for free and get free tech support in the forums, I used to be very active there and I can say without a doubt that you will receive help within minutes at the Ubuntu forums as there are always people there waiting to help and I don't think that MS has an official free help forum as that is not their plan ( their plan is to get that money, end of plan ).

Bill Gates got out while the getting was good, he saw what was coming and exited stage left since the jig is almost up ( all the evidence is there just waiting for the sheeple to figure this out ). MS has been stealing and monopolizing computer code for years and at this junction the best thing for consumers would be their demise, then let the market replace them with a customer satisfaction driven OS not a "hey we got you by your balls what you gonna do about it OS"

And lastly what about steven balmer and his youtube videos, if that guy is not on ritalin, addarol, meth or coke then I am a chinese jet pilot ( hint - I am not a chinese jet pilot ). I couldn't believe the level of unprofessional conduct of this individual, he should be a pit boss at some casino somewhere not the CEO of MS. MS screws up on every front except raping people and not caring and at those hobbies it is a master craftsmen.

no DRM, no activation.. and "my computer, my rules"

Does Windows 7 have this? doubtful.

Until then.. MS is just the same greedy, evil company it has been.

Since M$ have over 90% of the market, its kind of pointless even writing an article like this, it won't be enough to stop people using Linux. Linux use grows everyday. Linux has it's own market and it's growing steadily

I for one use Ubuntu full time on my home machine.

Reasons for using Ubuntu:
I can use my PC how I like.
I am not tied into using M$ products.
I don't need software to combat Spyware.
I don't need to worry about Viruses.
I am learning new technologies.
I can run my own server free of charge.
I can download my OS free of charge.
I can install sofware quicker than in Windows.
I use FIrefox.
More companies are now supporting Linux.
Everything worked out of the box.

This is enough for me. No glossy GUI or anything from M$ will make me move.

Did you pull your brain and stick it up your arse before you wrote the article?

You have so many flaws in this article it seems you never really used any current GNU/Linux distro.

From a resource, eyecandy, security and stability wise point of view the Ubuntu just to mention one distro is far superior. Did I mention "free to not pay for it and change it to pleasure"?

If it was not for some games I would not even have Micro$oft on my system.

I am not a programmer or super geek. I know enough to be dangerous and still know 1000% more than most the people I work with. I have tried every version of free Linux trying to create a non Microsoft desktop at home. Every single time I want to add something it is a major pain and it doesnt work. I have a life and a family and do not have time to recompile anything and the instructions are a joke. The support blogs are worthless with lots of opinions but no substance. I have spent a fortune on Linux books that never really apply to the version I have installed.
So what does this mean? I am back to Microsoft everytime. Why? So I can do more than check my mail and browse.

Is Vista perfect, No. OSX crashes on me just as much as Vista at 3 times the cost, maybe I am lucky with vista but I am running it on 6 "new" machines with no real issues.

If W7 cost is fair I will upgrade. If a "Linux" company would come out with a main stream version with real simple instructions and easy installation and upgrade paths I would be intersted but as far as I can see the Linux community is very proud of non innovation and staying in the geek planet.

It comes down to my time and MS can do everything I need on one OS, over priced Fruit cant and neither can Linux.

The whole point of this article is to create controversy, just like those cheap flicks that make millions of dollars because of the buzz. This guys sparked a controversy in the IT world and you fell for the bait. He wins.

Seriously. Your title suggests the opposite of what your article states. I don't get it. You make a statement about a problem in Win7 only to say that Ubuntu handles it well. So which is it? I know win7 is in beta but WTH?

For documents, email, and even many games I'll stick to my Ubuntu home system. For web servers I will stick to Apache on Nix.

I am only using windows currently to run software that unfortunately is Win specific.

I tried to install Windows 7 on top of my Windows XP and it gave me a message that it cannot upgrade XP but can upgrade Vista.
It also could not recognize my Adaptec SATA card. After I loaded Vista Drivers, it saw the card and the HDD on it but could not do anything further i.e cannot partition it or install Windows 7 on it.
The beta Windows 7 is better than Vista but has all problems that Vista has.

Windows 7 is like the pinch on the arm to make you forget about the massive kick Vista gave to your balls.

I shouldn't feed the trolls ... but sometimes I wish people would JUST READ WHAT'S WRITTEN. My home pc is a homebuilt with less than a gig of ram (and it flies just fine running "update --emerge" on gentoo :-).

But I haven't heard of ANYWHERE people can get components to build their own laptop/netbook. I want a decent keyboard (one that it's possible to touch-type on), and if anybody can point me to one of these that comes with linux and is cheaper than its Windows counterpart I will be delighted. I'VE NEVER SEEN ONE. The only one I have seen, you have the choice of XP on an 80Gb hard-drive, or for £30 EXTRA, you can swap it for linux on a 40Gb SSD. I want to pay for linux on the HD, thank you very much (or even just for a blank HD), but that's not an option, unfortunately.

Cheers,
Wol

At first I thought this article was going to bash linux.... good review.

Linux comes in many different flavors, you don't have to try Ubuntu. If you're looking for a very fast desktop, watch some videos on E17! The great thing about Linux, you have a choice. It doesn't hurt to find a local LUG to push you along the way.

People who write tech articles should know something about tech.

WHO complains about drivers on a beta? It's idiotic. Drivers responsibility is with the 3rd party company. Nvidia, ATI, etc.

Look at how many shortcuts he has on his desktop. Those who used this beta first learn to use the new taskbar as it was designed. Programs you use often should go on the taskbar because it manages so many applications so efficiently now.

I am using a Phenom Black edition with 4 GB of 'SUPER fast ram' and a dedicated HD for the OS. I have an NVIDIA 9600 with 1GB ram, and a Creative Xtreme Music sound card. I have a 26 inch screen and I have had NO problems with windows. A few APPLICATION problems which IS EXPECTED in a beta.

The article should have been one paragraph. 'It's amazing, runs smooth, efficient and pleasing design, cool modifications, more functionality, stable OS for a beta, the OS is practically an RC1 in quality especially when comparing to Vista. Most nerds are loving the OS.' etc because this is how most techies have viewed it so far, because IT IS amazing.

I'm not a Linux idiot. I enjoy Ubuntu but it isn't as good as an OS as people claim. Giving grandma an OS to learn. Windows Vista or Ubuntu... as much as Vista had a FEW flaws(not as much as people claim) grandma can learn vista. I'd love her to learn the boot knowledge and terminal understanding I had to just to get Ubuntu to dual boot. I'd LOVE to teach grandma about Ubuntu's easy UI.

Ubuntu is great with the internet, finds drivers, easy access to free apps. Open source is good, and has the best potential, but people need to reckognize that even Vista is better than Ubuntu, Windows 7 is better than both.

Open office is crap as well. Maybe in 2003, I would have thought, wow, amazing. But MS Office 2007 beats all office apps HANDS DOWN. The ribbon is better and everyone knows it. Office 14 comes out next year and will probably have even cooler options.

Open office had better keep up by then.

You are assuming that 7 will work out of the box. Trust me it will have problems! But if you want to go through all of the hassle of arm-wrestling and field testing the OS for MS be my guest.

Given what you have written you have given me no complelling reason to switch from Ubunutu or Linux Mint. I suspect the same will be true for the vast majority of XP users. Like an old car that is running fine in a recession, why buy and new one and saddle yourself with payments. Drive the old one until it falls apart.

Finally a question? What can I do with 7 that I can't do with XP or Ubuntu? You never answered that one.

Meh. My beef with Vista was primarily the shell, and of that, primarily Windows Explorer.

Windows 7 is even worse than Vista in this regard. A single example: there's no easy way to start up more than one instance of Windows Explorer - Win+E, Start | Programs | Accessories | Explorer, the new taskbar button, all of them simply switch to the current instance.

This problem is a deal-breaker for me. There are many other shell, configuration and customization problems, but I'm not going to labour the point here. Suffice it to say, I think Windows 7 is "Vista for stupid people".

This set of posts sums up pretty well why *NIX desktops have failed to dislodge Microsoft's stranglehold over desktop computing. Unix is by far the better operating system than Windows, and I've built a consulting practice around it (primarily FreeBSD & Solaris) since 1995. Apple seems to recognize it's strengths as well, given their adoption of FreeBSD as the foundation for OSX. The problem is that the typical *NIX fanatic not only overlooks the ease-of-use and hardware compatibility flaws endemic to the various *NIX desktops, they enjoy wallowing in the 'Wizard status' figuring out how to deal with all that confers upon them.

The subtle differences between Windows and *NIX desktops are obvious to those of us who love Unix, but still rely upon XP to get work done on the desktop. The best *NIX desktop I've seen so far have been Solaris (Gnome) and PCBSD. They still suffer from sparse support for hardware while just about everything works with Windows (even Vista, which I believe should be the basis of criminal charges against Microsoft, BTW). Worse, it usually takes 2 or 3 times as long for the *NIX OS to respond to an application load request. Supporters may think this doesn't matter, but that's the point. Ordinary users expect things to happen when they click (or doubleclick), when they don't they either repeat, or try something else. Then the real mayhem begins. When you try to interrupt a process, that entire 'detail' is poorly managed if it's managed at all.

The final nail in the coffin is the "our way is better than the Windows way" mentality which afflicts those who are behind most *NIX desktops. If you (we) want to 'win', make your *NIX desktop do everything that XP does with a generic XP-like GUI that Windows users can select and use. There's absolutely nothing preventing you from adopting whatever else you prefer, but Vista was the golden opportunity for *NIX to begin dismantling Microsoft's hegemony over mainstream desktop computing. That opportunity still exists, but the 'Window is closing'. And by the way, one of the very best *NIX desktops for Windows compatibility is Xandros. Look for them to be bought by Microsoft sometime this year. If that happens, game over.

After 3 years XP got reasonably stable.
Now with this update called 7 Vista seems to become closer to XP stability level.
I use on one machine XP (laptop bought with Vista but performance did not please me). On another machine (11 years old laptop 256Mb ram around 800MHz) I run Mandriva 2009 used with Skype and Firefox.
Have been thinking about a beautiful MAC but then again new MAC compatible CS software would make this rather expensive.
I have no crystal ball and can not see the future, but with Linux stable KDE reasonably good looking (better than XP) I await the time when Linux can run all my programs at decent speed and there will be no more MS in my working space.

Linux is the fastest growing OS in the World.
except in the land of the Free its growth is slowed by Monopoly$oft, even though, it is still growing at a healthy clip.
Gates' company can't compete in the long haul with Open Source software because he can't buy it.
If it comes down to the World vs. Microsoft, bet on the World.

The hype surrounding Windows 7 has been absolutely incredible (though less than Apple hype). Nobody talks about it, but the Windows 7 kernel is literally identical to Vista's, the driver models have been left 100% unchanged and the only real tweaks that have been made to Windows 7 relate to better multi-core performance - multi-core meaning noticeable benefits starting from 16 cores or more. There were also supposedly tweaks made to startup and shutdown times but I haven't really seen much benefit from them.

Has anybody noticed that when Vista was released, nobody had drivers for it and that we were all using comparatively very low-end hardware? When Vista was launched, most of us were still on single-core CPUs with 1GB or 2GB of RAM, though a select few were already running dual-core chips. Now Windows 7 is getting tested on systems with 4GB of RAM or more and quad-core CPUs, in addition to mature drivers.

I'm not saying Windows 7 is bad. On the contrary, its really good. I'm just saying that the bad rap that Vista got is thoroughly undeserved at this point. Throw Vista on the same machines you are installing Windows 7 on and you'll be hard-pressed to spot the differences (aside from GUI changes and UAC prompts, of course). Sure, Windows 7 is tweaked a little, but its hardly a world of difference that the media is reporting it to be.

Oh well, at least Microsoft has figured out how to market Vista. Who would've guessed that rebadging what is pretty much the same OS could change user opinion too much. Make fun of the Mojave experiment all you want, Microsoft is performing it again, but on a much larger scale this time...

When did the Inq become a hangout for linux fanatics?

7 runs great on 1GB of RAM with moderate multi tasking, maybe you should try it.

Boots and shuts down FASTER than XP on my THREE year old LAPTOP. MUCH faster than that crappy UBUNTU.

Farrell young man, time & time again to redefine the definition of a handicapped clown, or is it the fact you have your head so far up monkey boy Ballmer's crack your eyes are an Outlook to a gapping chasm. Get a life boy!

One of the biggest mistakes microsoft did with vista (other than rushing out a OS which didnt work well) was try and rip off customers by offering loads of different versions and baffling most people who ended up sticking with XP...

... Microsoft need to keep Windows 7 simple, offer 2 versions Home and Business and sell home for $100 and Business for $200 - Simple!

I run Xubuntu just fine on a 700 Mhz PIII with 512 MB of RAM. What does Windows 7 offer me?

While you are all filling up landfills with 3-year-old toxic computer waste so you can participate in Microsoft's addiction to the latest hardware, I'll be computing away for years with free software and hardware I rescued from the trash.

What do I gain by buying new hardware, over-priced Windows software and sending my current computer to the landfill?

I make a living fixing computers. New Windows to the masses = more work for me. Linux = no work as people that use it can fix it themselves. So...everyone wins!!!! and my family can eat another day.

Buy it OEM! Vista Home premium was £250 in the UK and could be had OEM for £68!!

Yeah, our company with over 3000 pc's is going to upgrade from XP to Win 7 by replacing every PC since they only have 512 Meg of RAM. We are going to go through "Driver Hell" with all our legacy printers.

For what?

Everything we have works fine.
What is the draw to Win 7?
Nothing.

Since our apps work, why should we care about replacing an OS that is solid for our desktop needs.
Anything that is important to us is on UNIX.

Unbiased and fair article regarding Windows (quite a change after shitty Egan Something product). One may like or dislike w7, but this time we get what and why instead of crap, crap, crap mantra. I don't understand console (linux) fanboys - calm down ppl. What r u doing here - go to your beloved linux forums and masturbate there about your superiority.

You folks keeeeep talking, keeeep arguing and keeeeep passing yourselves off as experts. It's all FLUFF and you KNOW it.

Here's what will happen. Windows 7 will re-establish Microsoft as the OS leader, period. Now you can say it's because of pre-loading, or user dumbfounding, or folks just not knowing any better or because of the color of toilet water. It won't matter, because the fact is Windows 7 will rule. Does it really matter WHY?
Now, don't shoot me, I am not a Microsoft fanboy, and in fact I have big problems with a lot of what they are and do. But in this case, I know a winner when I see one, and unfortunately (for some) Win7 will be a winner. Now, I don't have any "evidence" for what I'm saying, but it doesn't matter. Don't believe it? Fine. Write this down, stick it in your wallet or purse for a year, then pull it out and see if I was wrong.

my install just blows. i get BSOD after just a few minutes each boot. and even quicker if i try to change anything in control panel. ive reinstalled a few times even with no other applications installed i have the problems.

something referring to tdx.sys and 1lx.sys cant remember the actual error.

thats the i386 version ,
when i try the 64bit. it installs all the way up to the final reboot. with the welcome title on the blue background with the spinning curser.
it never changes to the "now setting up your desktop" message. 20- 30 minutes i let it run.

when i ran the utility to check my "computer rating"
it came back at a 3.3
amd 4200 64bit x2
4gig ram
sata drive .
boots and runs ubuntu with compiz lightening fast.
xp just as quick .
but with w7?? below the median rating ?? come on

I love read articles written by guys who just talk but know nothing. Guys don't ask for benchmark. Do you really think the guy who wrote this knows what benchmark means? :D
Let me tell that Microsoft has done a market research about their os and Vista. They concluded that the name "vista" was related to horrible in the market. No matter for whom they asked the answer was always "Vista sucks". Even people who never used it.
Therefore they had to change the label. They've added a new looking of course, you don't want people comparing it to the vista disaster, changing explorer but the core is Vista.
Vista did improve with sp1 but it still uses tons of memory with no performance gain. Mine uses 1 giga RAM(os only) and run slower than my XP. That means it is a bad os.
XP is still the best os microsoft they've created. M$ knows that's why they forced us move to Vista making DX10 vista only. BTW the aero desktop eats 15 fpt of my laptop (Microsoft said that aero shouldn't affect performance) that's why it will stay off. :)
BTW Vista SP2 is about to be release. Don't expect gain from it. It runs just as SP1 with bluetooth support and other little changes.

PS: I would like to thank NVidia for v181.20. My life makes sense since it's release.

PS:

I'm thinking the author should have actually tried the upgrade from XP to 7. If you do, you will be greeted with an error message that upgrading is only available from Vista installations.

The author complains about the install time but does not mention how long it took. For me, it installed in 25 minutes. My experiences with Ubuntu have been around the same. Both were pretty easy and both had just about everything working out of the box. Of course, I've never considered install times a major factor in judging an OS. Once it's installed, who cares.

The author claimed IE8 was crap, but didn't provide any actual reasons or lists of sites he couldn't browse. IE8 could very well be crap, but this article leaves a reader no way to verify for themselves other than experimentation. It hasn't given me trouble yet, but it's not like I've had very long to test it.

I'm really curious about the high ram and CPU requirements everyone keeps discussing. My test machine has only 1 GB of ram and runs Windows 7 without any trouble. I'm finding Windows 7 handles memory considerably better than Vista, but still not as well as Linux. *Nix, will likely always edge out Windows in this regard.

About Windows 7 killing the Linux desktop, I have to disagree. The Linux desktop will be completely unaffected by Windows 7. The people running it are getting exactly what they want. The average user will never turn to *Nix for their desktops. Even Ubuntu is still too complicated for the average user. The retraining costs alone mean it will never be adopted broadly by businesses. Linux is doomed to forever wallow in relative obscurity as a hobbyists' OS. I love it, but I don't have any illusions about it taking over the desktop world. Seriously, Macs would take the market before Linux ever could and even they have only managed a measily near-10% of the market.

Sentinel

@Kronosmen:

You are a jackass... Why not just not use a computer at all? People DID exist before computers were here to help us... so what the fuck is the point of your post? Welcome to the future...

Glad you like Windows7. Glad you have a choice to go back to M$ if you want to.

As for me - I'll stick with Ubuntu Linux. Best thing that ever happened to me. My old hardware (2yrs) runs like a champ. My system stays updated and secure and I can do anything I need to do and everything I did before on the thing without effort.

Have used both M$ and Mac OS's for years. They are good in their own way, but I'm tired of both companies endless scheming to make my system obsolete the minute I open the box.

XtremeMax101: Realise is the correct British spelling of the word that the US (& others) spell realize. Your comment = epic fail and has as little to do with the article as this comment.

"I was disappointed. It was pretty good and, if I am right, could result in the move away from Voleware to Linux and OSX being stopped in in its tracks."

These sentences DON'T make any fucking sense... and you are an idiot for writing this piece of crap review. kthnxbye

P.S. welcome to the future

So, Microsoft did a decent job a theming Windows 7; who cares? And what makes you think that by the time Windows 7 comes out, that look won't have been cloned anyway?

The things that sent people packing to Ubuntu and OS X haven't changed because they can't change: the Windows APIs, toolkits, formats, and generally proprietary environment.

Windows 7 is a lipsticked pig, and it will at best slow down the bleeding a little.

Windows still runs everything without admin approval and so is wide open to security vulnerabilities. End of story we can't use it in our business.

Also Linux distros won't lock down your system if you upgrade to much. Or worse yet try traveling to another country on business, plugging in your laptop, and updating Windows. LOCKED UP. That did it for me. Has this changed for 7?, no.

Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop?
If you believe this, you must be the one buying the swampland in Florida.
Article topic header should read,
“Microsoft smoke clouds steers sheep herders to Windows 7”

It's great that new Windows is better than Ubuntu. But I am using Linux for almost 8 years, and Ubuntu is one of the worst linuxes I ever tried. So what if windows someday will kill ubuntu? It will be great win for better distributions.
There just two main kinds of users - someone likes "out-of-the-box" experience, another like to do everything in their own way. Ubuntu and windows is for first kind, KDE and some other desktops - for second. I don't like someone choosing for me what is better and what is not.

Stormy-

"but it is hardly the most userfriendly and eyecatching distro out there."

Win7 will be crap compared to Ubuntu.

Microsoft is still playing catch-up on features that have been available to Linux for the last 5 years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

"Windows 7 is as pretty as Apple stuff, just as easy to use..."

Who do you think you are kidding, Nick? I mean, besides yourself.

Go squirt your bile someplace else... what a joke.

Another pointless religious war.

Is windows slower than a stripped down linux build? Of course! Is that maybe because windows supports a lot more things natively and is more stupid-user friendly? There ya go!

I don't run windows to use windows- I run it to use other applications. By and far, more things run under windows.

People are still whining about vista? Why? Mine runs fast, has never crashed, and all of my peripherals run perfectly. What more do I want other than maybe getting the OS for free.

I can use linux just fine (and I used unix before most of you were out of diapers). But what about my mother, my tech clueless friend? Linux isn't easy enough for them and if Linux ever does become easy enough for them it'll be as big of a pig as windows.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Deal with it!

... this is the most rambling, ill thought out, most poorly conceived bit of yellow journalism I've ever read.

This article is a joke! I hope someone isn't paying you to write this nonsense...

You should see KDE 4.2 RC1 (kubuntu.org has the repo for intrepid). I think it is every bit as beautiful as Windows 7. (more-so) It can also natively handle Google Gadgets via Plasma.

I love reading these comments, and as always, I knew there would be some little ticked off Linux boys posting bashing Microsoft and vice versa. Anyway, I want to give my unbiased opinion on the two, Linux and Windows.

First of all, let me talk about Linux. Is it really that great of an operating system as everyone here portrays? Of course it is, and this is coming from someone that uses Windows also. It's a very stable OS (excuse me for not calling it a kernel as someone here mentioned), and I've tried many different distros of it. Yes, you can do just about anything on it that you can do with Windows, but how easy is it really to get it to do certain things for the average joe? Even though you penguin fans out there would hate to admit it, you would agree with me that it takes more time and KNOWLEDGE to configure the OS. Even for me who knows Linux well, I sometimes don't have the time to configure every little change I have to make in Linux to get something new to run on my system. I usually end up restaring my PC and boot right into Windows where I know it will work. It is great and such a breeze for Linux guys, but try putting a new PC user, or better yet, an experienced Windows XP user in front of a Linux system and let them free. What happens? Absolutely nothing, or at some point, he or she will be stuck while trying to use something and will have no idea what "sudo" or even "root" means. Linux is a great OS, and I can't stress that enough, but it's no where near Windows as far as its ease of use. It's not even remotely close to being user friendly. Maybe if you just want to use it to type out documents or surf the web, it's not so bad, but even then, good luck to the newbie trying to install their printer to print that document and good luck when they run into a website that requires Internet Explorer or needs a plugin to be installed through ActiveX.

One exellent thing about Linux is its ability to run on older hardware. This is a good thing for you guys who don't want to or can't shell out the cash for better and newer systems, but you still have a problem when it comes to gaming. You can't do it, for the most part anyway. Solitaire isn't so bad.

Do you Linux guys see my point yet? Sometimes you have to be humble and lower yourself to the level of the average PC user out there. Yes, it may be hard for you guys to do, but give it a try. It won't hurt you.

Now comes Windows. Is it really a resource hog like everyone says it is? Yes. Does it crash more often then Linux? Yes. Is it more user-friendly than Linux. Yes, and that's important. But what makes everyone hate Windows so much, particularly Vista? You're running it on the wrong machine. You need a very good system to run Windows, especially Vista, and I cannot stress that enough to you people out there that find Windows to be slow. I know some of you right now are thinking, "Oh wait a minute! Why should I have to pay so much money every year or so to have a good running system!?" That's the thing. You don't. That's why they have Linux for you guys, but more on that later. So, I do blame Microsoft for not putting higher minimum system requirements on their packaging, but they won't because they want everyone to buy the OS, including those who are still running Pentium III's or below. They're a business, and they're here to make money, but little do they realize their pissing off a lot of people in the process. I also blame the PC manufactuers out there for selling low end "value" PCs. I've been in retail, selling PCs and fixing them, and there is always gonna be that person who wants to take the cheap way of buying a PC. They will ask you, "What's the cheapest PC y'all sell here?" I point it out to them and ask them what they will be using it for and they go on to say they'll be using it for anything and everything. I always explain to them that it CAN do what they want, but it is a low end system and it will run slow, and they usually change their mind and say, "Oh it's ok. I only REALLY need it for basic stuff. So I sell it to them, and of course, they're always the first ones back asking why it runs so slow and that they want their money back. They go on a rant and say they'll buy the computer elsewhere or from a different manufactuer. Little do they know that they'll run into the same exact problem cuz their forgetting the most important rule; you get what you pay for.

The bottom line is each OS has its pros and cons. I can go on all day and write a book about the two if I start talking about benchmarking and what not, but the key point is you choose your OS based on what you're willing to pay for. If you're very frugle and don't want to keep your system up to date or have an older or low end system, go with Linux, but be prepared to know the ins and outs of it or spend time Googling how to get something to work. Now if you have the money to buy a good PC, and I mean a GOOD PC, and want one of the easiest OS to use out there, go with Windows. And to even things out, if you have even more money and want an even more user friendly OS, buy a Mac lol (just don't expect to game on it though). What propietary system builders out there should do is get rid of low end Windows PCs and only sell mid to high end with Windows and introduce low end systems with Linux only. Of course, consumers should be aware of the differences but at least it would be understood that they will have to go through a learning curve if they want a cheap computer. Better yet, put a very friendly GUI on these systems to where they can only do what they supposedly intend to do with them, basic stuff. Then they can't come back to you ranting and you'll be able to tell them, "I told you so." :)

We have a trio of Linux computers, several Linux powered appliances, and a 3 month old MacBook. I've been using Linux since about 2001 and I can't see a reason in the world to go back to Microsoft for anything. We have WinXP for games but won't likely ever update to Win7.

I use Linux at work on a few machines and there just isn't anything in my daily life that I need XP for. Linux has offered me freedom to try new things that would have been quite expensive with Windows. Linux continues to offer a very positive user experience that I could not get in Windows at any price.

People continue to be shocked that there is a free OS with tons of software available for it for free. The tide is turning b/c ordinary people I know now understand what Linux is. I have also had ordinary people ask me to put "Lee-nucks" (as one neighbor called it) on his new laptop that came with Vista. I witnessed virgin Vista hang and crash with no other software installed. His laptop now rockets along running Ubuntu.

FWIW the challenge for me was to find a Linux distro that was far enough back from the bleeding edge to be stable. We use MintLinux, TinyME Linux (for low spec machines), and PCLinuxOS. I also have a Nokia N810 that runs Maemo of course.

Each time I have used Vista it has been on brand new machines with little of no new software added and it has been sluggish. What are those computers going to be like in 5 years after a few SP's and some bit rot? On a few occasions I have had the opportunity to install the most recent versions of Linux and those same machines have been rockets with all the little eye-candy desktop tricks.

Oh - and the Macbook. Flawless since day 1. Yes it was expensive (~$1K) but I've found that cheap PCs don't offer enough horsepower to do the sort of things I like to do with the Mac. I'm still spending close to the Macbook price for a PC.

Did I miss something? In the same paragraph you say you where dissapointed but then go on to say it was pretty good and "could result in the move away from Voleware to Linux and OSX being stopped in in its tracks."
I'll consider that a typo. I haven't used Windows 7 very much yet but it is installed and I plan on using it. So far, it still seems like Windows Vista. Still, Windows is far more versital than OSX and Linux and I would recommend Windows to parents or a virgin computer adult user before OSX and Linix twice on Sunday.

In a bid to focus my bile on something other than Apple for a bit I decided to play with the new Windows 7 beta. I was disappointed. It was pretty good and, if I am right, could result in the move away from Voleware to Linux and OSX being stopped in in its tracks

How much had Ballmer paid you for this article?

I too am a Linux user of various distros but some of you Linux fanbois are doing your "cause" a disservice. This article is a opinion piece and the author wrote it adequately. Some of the zealous replies however are pure crap and if I were a Windows newbie I would be ultimately turned off from Linux just because they would not want to join a crowd of douchebags like some of you are acting.

Windows 7? Do I still have to clean the registry now and then, defrag the harddisk, install an antivirus, spyware cleaner, firewall? Will it be cheaper than XP? And yea.. that stupid IE. Does it sport a total OS kernel revamp or is it just vista stripped down so that it doesnt remind anyone that its actually vista. I wouldnt mind if its an improved XP though but I will really puke if I find out that they pulled a fast one on everyone by repackaging Vista as win 7 to stem the vista fiasco

I didn't even read the article... I just came here to plead with people to stop with the sensational headlines like "Windows kills linux" or "Linux is doomed to die"... it's so insulting. I use Linux all day long, no problems... so do many other people... some people like Windows... great. The reality is, no matter how you dress up windows, it's still the same flawed OS under the hood... so no matter how many "widgets" they add, it's still the same crap.

No OS is gonna kill any other OS.. they'll all go on and on into the future. So give up the sensational headlines. Geez!

totally agree with the price. Microsoft should be going to market share and keeping people in the fold so they don't run to apple. Offer this at $99, and give a family pack (5 computers) for $179 or so. No one wants to pay $150 x 4 for all their computers. Apple has much better licensing at this point in early 2009. Microsoft should learn from that.

It was like wading through treacle. Dozens of popups asking about updates, eight before I could use IE. I think Windows users have had their expectations lowered so much, they're willing to accept just about anything that isn't worse than Vista. Trust me, this is not a good OS.

The people i know of who didn't knew much about IT, had problems with vista too.
crashing, because mostly of hardware too poor for vista (and other bug i guess).

guess what os they use now? still vista yes that right... simply on a laptop with more ram. still using (and paying for) office of course. they don't have time or motivation to re-learn how an os work. really.

they needed nothing more.

change is the enemy.

when people complain about 800MB of their RAM being used when they have 3GB. Why did you buy that much RAM if you don't want it used? You can turn off some of the services and free up some of that ram if you need it that bad. My wifes OSX uses way more resources then my new windows 7 install. The point of RAM is to use it and not let it sit there unused.

First to Sean with all about how apples pricing is better than MS pricing, well I have 6 PC's running Ubuntu and the OS cost was $0 ( could you read that 0 as in zero,nothing,nada,zip so you Apple heads ought to wake up and smell the coffee that you guys are using dressed up modified BSD ( AKA LINUX ) code for real money when if you had real brains + hardware linux is better for $0 ( sorry that it takes brains and isnt automatic retard proof ). To all that say that linux forums don't help them - you must not mean Ubuntu forums since I know for a fact you can get top notch help there ( I have walked hundreds of new users through simple tasks & all for no pay just the satisfaction of helping others ).

Someone hit the nail on the head with "Windows 7 is Vista for stupid people". For all that are smart enough to use other OS's and are not at the intellectual mercy of MicroScum, there are ways out. For all others just say "I'm going to upgrade to Winblows 7" like the grey matter challenged individual you are. Well I am gald at least that MS is screwing up yet again and might actually be seeing the begining of the END OF MICROSCUM. The world would just simply be a better place if open source code was the code of choice, not stolen hidden obfuscated code as MS has bullied and done for years. PS and I don't think apple is so great either since with all their forcing Itunes shit down your neck and hardware limitations brought on for profit not performance's sake they are trying to act like the Microsoft that they sued and preached against in the 80's. In Apples case they saw that what worked for MS will work for them, well screw them too. I work on MS pc's for pay and own, use & admin linux boxes for the power they can wield VS $$$ for a shitty MS OS. And to Steven Ballmer why dont you go snort another line you retarded douche bag, you look like a fat whale on crack.

First of all, XtremeMax101, in UK English, the word 'realise' is spelt 'realise'. It's only a 'z' in American English.

To all of you technocrats: most of these arguments about linux as a viable mainstream OS are nonsense. You are right, it'll run on far less powerful hardware, any yes, it is more secure, and yes, it is 'free' but...
You're average person on the street doesn't want to be provided bombarded with endless variations, choose from a list of hundreds of individual components when installing the OS, worry that each and every one is compatible with each other and is configured correctly. Yeah, some of the desktops available for linux are great, but setting them up isn't easy unless you you have the time and interest. I don't want to sift through endless forums and version numbers of software, use command lines to unzip a file, naviagate through a horrifying collection on unhelpfully named folders just to find something on my hard drive.
Linux isn't ready for the man on the street, it's years and years away. We don't expect car owners to understand the internal workings of their gearbox, or have to adjust their suspension everytime they go for a drive, so why should we expect all computers users to understand protocols, command lines etc?

I have vista running on two machines: a test box in work which is nothing more than budget spec (C2D 6420, 3Gb ram) and a more powerful gaming spec PC at home (C2D E8500, 4Gb ram). In both cases it runs without issue. It takes care of itself. I have no idea what all the DRM thing is about Vista, I have masses of media across a number of PCs and devices and I've never encountered an issue. It really does work.

simply speaking, for every 1 of you techies, there's 99 people who want to surf and play games, maybe write a word doc or two. Linux still isn't ready for them, and Vista is.

OK, I installed into a virtual machine so I wont really be able to fully use the OS and it is just a Beta but something comes to mind:

I don't like Microsoft because of its' business practices and the fact that it can't be trusted in its' collaboration with the Government. I am not such a harsh critique of their software. I have Vista Ultimate or Home Premium installed on 5 computers (3 desktops and 2 notebooks) and they all work without ANY problems...of course they are all recent machines with very good configurations. After learning how to turn off some of Vista's features (not difficult to do) I don't know anyone who has a problem with the OS.

I run Linux and xp on some computers and each has its' advantages and draw backs. As for Apple.....no way can their low level hardware configurations compare with a similarly priced Power PC. That's just a fact and all the Fan Boy defensive ravings wont change over hyped, over priced Apple hardware.

To defend ones' choice is fine but lets remain truthful in our critiques.

Insulting the Author for giving his opinion is beneath us or has Bush contaminated everyone's mind?

People buy RAM because they want to run applications in it, not give it to the OS to hog. I'm not sure what you think OSX is using, but it will run, with all the pretty graphics, in 512M and is comfortable in 1GB. Windows 7 is nowhere near that compact (and yes, I have installed it myself).

Man, someone says Windows is losing fans or Apple and is gaining sheep and nobody panics, but say that one little Linux will die and everybody loses their minds!

Do you know why Unbuntu is becoming as bloated and slow as Windows? Its because its becoming friendlier and more compatible. That's why Windows is so large and slow in the first place. Try writing an OS that is stable, compatible with nearly every program and piece of hardware, is easy to use by even grandma and is pretty to boot and what you will end up with will be, by default, large and in charge. They say that Windows becomes more "bloated" with every iteration, but how can it not when they add more too it while having to keep legacy? I'm sorry, but windows is still the best OS out there and the cries of fanbois will not make it otherwise.

*

In English it's spelt with an "s". Don't call it UK English - they don't speak English in Scotland - it's called Scots (not to be confused with the language the Scots speak - that's called Gaelic!). The Saxons speak English in the South of this beautiful Isle, the Angles (or Sassenachs) speak Scots in the North, and the Scots speak Gaelic in the West. All clear now? Clear as mud, I guess.

Cheers,
Wol

I have not read so much crap in a post for years, I do suspect it was intended to achieve this reaction however.

The Win7-OS has been on my dedicated pc for exactly 177 minutes. Enough to know this is a nicely and smoothly designed OS. Like Paris. One is easily seduced by the look of it. But facts. I didn't find anything spectacular, and some settings are very hard to change. Or to find. But even worse, and something I never experienced for the last 2 years or so, is a hickuping VLC or Winamp. Streams are rendered in little pieces. Unbearable. While I like to work on my websites while listening to a nice Loungy Stream...
SO the OS was thrown out. The DVD will chase the birds or so, nothing more. I'm writing this on an older pc with Antix8, it will never get to know Paris or Win7, but in runs smoothly and does everything I want from an OS, including pleasing my ears.

I agree with much of this article other then the fact that I can't get Mass Effect (through Steam Client) to run for the life of me. The thing that will kill all credibility of this potential OS is really two things spying on users (this will be there for sure) and subscription based licensing. From previous articles I've read about Windows 7 is that M$ is going to subscription based licensing. Personally I hope M$ does push this subscription since I want M$ to crash and burn to at least a point where they loose their arrogance and start working with the IT industry instead of thinking they can do what they want.

I do believe and always believed that the biggest software vendor in the world by leaps and bounds should be able to put all other OS's under ground with ease but in the 17 years I've been using computer I have yet to see this happen. M$ could lead the industry by being smart about things heck they have the largest team of lawyers then anyone else so if anyone would try to screw them over they could mash them with ease. M$ should do what they have been mandated by the courts since they have been convicted multiple times on charges of being a monopoly to open up their protocols to allow 3rd party vendors to compete.... FOR FREE. Not their current method of saying "Yes we allow 3rd party vendors have access to our protocols for a miniscule fee of $10000 USD". As mentioned above they are the biggest software vendor and they should not fear that little shops could even make anything nearly as nice or easy to use as they can but this is M$ and they want to crush everyone else.... with that mindset by definition that would make them a monopoly thus being illegal therefore persuing this path is illegal from the get go.

Windows 7 Beta 1 is good, runs fast and there are few issues that I have found yet but I'm still not convinced that I would pay full price for this, I have been forced to take vista on two laptops recently purchased and unless there is a 50.00 - 100.00 CND upgrade path for vista owners I ain't touching this shit even if it is better and this "Upgrade" is not some stupid assed disk that needs to have vista installed before it does the upgrade. If it asks for my vista license during install I have no problems with that but it has to be full install disk so I don't ever have to have any vista code touch my hard drive ever again.

I just have a couple comments to make. First of all to the people saying that Vista/Win7 is great while running it on a top of the line machine. At one time a computer took 2 minutes to load a browser or major app, you couldn't burn a CD while doing ANYTHING else, and it took a long time to save a document.. In other words, hardware left something to be desired for the regular user and we needed an OS to run and be convienent on reasonable hardware.. Enter windows XP and Linux, and that is what we have. But now Microsoft seems intent on pushing further and insisting we have 4Gb and a quad core P4 to browse and burn DVDs (if your DVD will burn)... Well I don't want to play that game which is why I use Linux.
Comment #2: To all those that don't blame microsoft for designing an OS that is not compatible with hardware out there.. I say bull. It would be different if Microsoft allowed you use and supported XP as a lower cost option. But they don't do that so in my mind they are kind of sticking their necks out for these kinds of comments.

Why does this person even write for the Inq?
He is so ill informed and his logic is so off, that it makes it hard to take the inQ seriously.

Please get this Bill O'Reilly of tech away, he really shouldn't be shown in public.

And what about Windows ME, wasn't it the "Missing Link" Between Windows 98 and XP?? That's what Vista was, er uh is, well maybe will be, or had to be, whatever. Windows Vista was the natural path to Windows 7, let's hope Windows 7 IS it. So far in athe testing I have done with Windows 7 in a VM session it blows away even my native Windows XP session, except for IE 8 not quite up to par with some of my apps.

I can't believe you lot. How the hell can you blame MS for lack of driver support? They don't f**kin write the driver for your GPU or soundcard, do they!!! As for complaining about IE8 or other things not working properly, this software is a BETA and should be used as such, f**kin idiots.

BTW, just because a new OS tips up doesn't mean you have to ditch XP off your antique PC, just so you can moan about how you'll have to spend a fortune on upgrades. Here's a thought, why not just carry on using XP, you bloody tool!!! And the dumbass who whinged about the 18 different versions should go work for Ford or something, see if he can persuade them to stick to making just one model, like they used to (think it was the model T), see how long it takes the door to hit his ass on the way out.

All these comments prove that you are all just out to bad mouth MS regardless of which Windows version is being discussed. If you don't want to use Windows, fine, don't, but don't try to convince the rest of us that because you think Windows sucks that makes it a fact. Ok it's flawed but which OS isn't.

"...it was made by Voles in Volish factories in Vole land." Hilarious!

I hear a lot of you idiots complaining about DRM problems in Vista. I suspect this is largley because you have never actually used Vista, but heard somewhere on the internet that it had "that DRM thing".

Fact is I've been using Vista for quite some time, I have oodles of legitimate and not so ligitimate media loaded onto the machine and the OS hasn't once interfered with what I was doing.

Get a collective clue people.

I'm all for Linux, but but...99% of games
only run on Windows. If Linux could run
all games, sales of Linux would fill
90% of the operating system pie and no one would buy Microsoft.

The problem with Vista DRM is how much it damages the performance of the system. Want to view a HD video? Unless you have a HDMI/HDCP monitor then it will downsample it to SD before playing it. If you HAVE got the blessed video hardware then the video stream is sent encrypted to the video card, which must decrypt and render it (more load at both ends). If for some reason Vista loses faith in your video driver then back to SD again you go (and because of this you nolonger get unified drivers which cover all of the models from one manufacturer).
Sound is similarly broken. Changes to the driver model in Vista mean that echo cancelation, used to filter out feedback when chatting in, say, SKYPE, nolonger works properly. Audio synchronisation and latency are also broken because of the driver model change.
What Microsoft have done is to provide a DRM platform that you might be able to run your code and view/listen to your media on. What they should have done is produce a platform that runs code, plays and views media etc as well as is physicaly possible, and then bolt on just enough DRM to stop normal users from copying stuff (nothing is going to stop the serious pirates).

For all of the MS haters commenting here and abroad. My job is maintaining *nix systems. Linux is a poor substitute for HPUX. RHEL has such rediculous issues with networking that it should be pulled from the 'shelves'. It also has memory leaks all the time and yes applications crash. Its all due to bad code mind you, an issue that ONLY MS catches any heat for.

Lets see the open source community build an OS where you never have to see a command line to fix an issue or optimize your system.

Lets see the MacOS available to be installed on whatever platform I choose, and well see how good an OS it really is. OSX has TONS of issues on a VERY stable hardware family, what would happen if you installed it willy nilly on any old genaric hardware combination....FAILURES GALORE. The Apple Cowards are affraid of the ridicule and damage to thier image that would ensue.

And one issue that most *nix lover complain about, the CLI, well check out Power Shell.

The stupid OS arguments are OLD and there is no right answer, except, use the proper tool for the job.

In defense of VISTA...I can run SONAR PE 8 with 30+ audio tracks and 50+ plugins with NO issues and inperceptible latency, So dont talk to me about it being a resource hog. You can turn off SuperFetch and get your precious unused memory back, or leave it on and enjoy fast app load times.

I tried Windows 7, and it is what Vista should have been from day one, and it should also be released as a service pack. I actually like the Vista Gui better. MS should also reduce thier versioning count to Server and Desktop, and make different desktop roles an option at install, Like Linux has always done. Linux users, Mac users, please give Windows 7 a try on an available machine you may have lying around. Maybe you'll like it. Then bash it if you hate it.

Finnaly, the DRM argument.....STFU ya' idjuts. I want my creations protected so I can make some scratch on music that I am involved in and helped to create. Songs dont (always) fall out of ones nether regions, takes time and money. And as fun as it is, if I put something out in the world that I deam to be a product worthy of sale, I'd like it to be protected as such. If you believe that DRM adversly affects the OS as a whole, you are fooling yourself, and NO it has not been proven to do so.

@Steve Todd and others.

Please stop. Your propogation of myths about Vista doesn't help anybody. Yes, Vista has its problems. That doesn't mean you should make up new ones to peddle your freeware.

Steve said "Unless you have a HDMI/HDCP monitor then it will downsample it to SD before playing it."

That is 100%, absolutely, positively FALSE. Have you ever tried doing it, Steve? If you had, you'd know for sure that it isn't true.

Vista provides an API so that if an application wants to only allow full quality playback over "protected" HDCP sources then it can do so. Not one single application uses that capability yet. Why offer it? Because it's part of the BluRay spec, and players that license BluRay technology are required to implement this if they want to play discs that have a certain flag enabled. Right now, no discs have that flag enabled.

If such discs do come out, then the Windows XP and Linux players will have exactly the same limitation, or won't be able to play the content at all.

If such discs do come out, DON'T BUY THEM.

There is absolutely 0 DRM code in Vista that will run if you don't use DRM'd content. Really, how hard is that to wrap your head around?

More details about the myths your spreading are here:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=154

Everytime I read one of these "My OS is better then your OS" articles I laugh my butt off. Clearly my hope that the communities of all these different platforms would grow up and recognize each other's strengths and weaknesses is a false one.

So where should we start? Ah, howabout this Vista crap. "Boo hoo Vista sucks so bad" blah blah blah. Ya know what? I installed Vista Ultimate on one of my gaming machines a few months before release (my job afforded me a free copy for support reasons), and it's still running it now. How many problems have I had with Vista? One. And that was due to a very poorly built driver on nVidia's behalf. Vista's launch was ungodly perfect in comparison to the early days of XP. "But Vista rapes my computer cuz its old" Well guess what dumbass, get a new freakin computer. It's a next-gen OS, built for next-gen computers. It's not made to go on the P4 your daddy bought you for school 3 years ago. Anyone that has any kind of decent skill with computers can easily tweak Vista to be minimally annoying (disable the UAC for example) and function relatively well. And DRM? Please, my system had over 4k MP3s, and about 150GB of video with no issue. WMP 11 didn't seem to care.

Linux. What can I say about Linux? It's fast, efficient, small profile, uses resources efficiently. Will Windows 7 kill it? Are you kidding me? If you think Windows will -ever- kill Linux on the desktop you are seriously braindamaged. As stated previously Linux is capable of nearly everything Windows Vista and 7 is capable of, except for the fact its completely free of charge. The only reason my systems aren't all running Linux is because for my desktop, well as I said previously I'm a gamer, and though Linux has made leaps and bounds on this front, the gaming domain still rests firmly in the Windows arena.

Then of course there is MacOS. I would get into this here, but it isn't necessary, since it is not the topic of discussion.

In short, every OS has it's pluses and minuses. The only true problem that makes one OS better then the other, is the person using it. If you're too dumb to tweak and fix it, YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK! GOODBYE!

...The author dared to question the almighty penguin on the home territory of the Linux geek, the Internet. Hope he was wearing his flame proof thong today!

Seriously fanboys, get a life.

As a computer enthusiast I have used Linux a lot and would even go as far to say that I quite like it, you have to admit the usability is just not there for joe-schmo. No, I just don't care how many come out and say they got their granny to use it.

As for Vista it has it's problems but a lot of folk are simply jumping on the bandwagon. Case in point is the bit about DRM from the poster above. I have used Vista for about a year on my laptop and I don't think I've actually encountered the DRM with any media legitimate or otherwise. I have ripped and burned CD's and DVD's I own quite reguarly to other devices and computers with no problems.

As for 7 it seems quite good but I'll withhold my judgement until I use the final product.

Hello there,

Could someone please address the issue of "Cloud Computing" concept by Vole? Is the new os going to be a bloated cripware and the end user would have to pay extra $$$ to unlock additional features such as picture viewer, fax, etc?

Thanks guys.

the bad thing first...the comments! as usual people forget about freedom of choice. they don't understand that this is not limited to GNU/Linux but to everything. so we are free to use Microsoft of Apple as well if we want to pay for it.

second bad thing. almost everybody here is saying the same thing as everybody: Vista is crap! although they never booted into it. just follower of idiots. sorry, but it had to be said. vista is better than most people would expect. just because somebody who says astalavista instead of vista doesn't know what UAC is, makes it a bad OS? use google to improve your brain limits...

the good thing: i like your article. i'm the same as you, I use ubuntu for some needs and windows XP for others, mainly work. installed windows 7 beta on an UMPC and a second notebook. will install it also on my tablet in dual boot with ubuntu. it's just so great to test different platforms and less great to just always complain about it

Many people have put Mac OS on PC's.(the insanelymac forums have 300k members I think) I have and it works great. You have to do some tweaking though but it's not too hard. I don't care about Apple hardware, just the software. I think it is much better than Vista or Ubuntu. I have both on separate hard drives and usually switch between Leopard and Ubuntu. I still think that Ubuntu needs some work before the average user (average= one who doesn't know how to use computers) will use it. My first time with Ubuntu I couldn't get my wireless card to work, which meant no internet, and no way to search for help or download a driver. If Microsoft does away with their stupid over priced flavors and adopts a single version $129 like Apple, I think they will lose people more slowly to Apple and Linux. I don't think they will gain any market share.

My operating system has a bigger dick than your operating system. Did I just sum up most of the comments?

There is quite a long time i'm using Linux as well as M$ ( Linux 1.2 Windows 3.1 ) products, and they simply are not targeted to the same audience. Microsoft's Windows serie is clearly for newbies, but once you want to do advanced stuff Windows is not enough ! More than 20 years before releasing a free C compiler... Is that what U want for the future: Fucking brain-dead users that can't even fix every day troubles themslef ( since there is always good linux users around ^^ ) !
Last thing; If you wanna talk about linux you should try a fast "Linux From Scratch" first, and recommand your readers... reading when necessary, before stuggling hotlines, this is the real Linux World, a power user system theire is no compromse beetween speed nor ram nor visual quality when you have you do it yourself !
PS. I was wondering how could machines take conrol of the world... Here we are !
PS.. Future linux are planned to boot in less than 5 secs ( could any windows do that when it has been available ? )

This article is a piece of shit, you know that?

I had a good laugh at your desktop icons for christs sake man get yourself a rapidshare premium account and download the following applications

Adobe CS4 Master Collection
Office 2007
Eset Smart security
etc

Theyres better software to be had than that rubbish and you know it .

I don't know who would say that Ubuntu or Linux for that matter is so great. I've been using many different distros of Linux and they ALL have serious issues. Ubuntu blows itself up everytime it does updates and I have to reinstall. Don't even mention fixing the Xorg.conf file, that is so ridiculous that you have to do that after changing screen resolution to match your monitor. I dumped all my Linux machines and use OSX and Windows. I think this Version 7 is pretty nice for a beta. It installed perfectly and I was able to use some XP drivers for hardware that wasn't fully supported. All in all it is much better than Vista and WAYYYYY better than Ubuntu.

I totally agree with this article.

I am running Ubuntu with KDE 4.1 it works and it doesn't fail, but it is as slow as Vista! I will need to switch back the the old faster version without eye-candy.

I also use Vista as my GameLoader OS... and it keeps hanging and freezing around which is not quite fun. My first impressions from 7 are great, it is fast compared to Vista probably not as fast as XP but hey you get some additional eye-candy with 7. I will sure switch Vista for 7, because the first one is like Win ME!!

btw... I tested OSX as well. I dumped it after a few weeks, is this called a OS? lol, like you would call an iPod a high quality MP3-Player...

The only remaining issue with Linux is that Vendors are trying to make it into Microsoft Windows. Why do they keep releasing untested crap? And why are people trying to use .Net (Mono)? Strip all of the crap out of Linux and you get a flawlessly stable and useable OS. Goodbye Windows.

I agree that Windows 7 is going to kill off (at least mostly) Linux on the desktop. I also agree that W7 will put large bumps in Apple's road.
But I do not think that it will stop them dead.
If you look at Apple's growth record as a chart, you will see that they began growing rapidly before the name Vista was even announced.
If anything Vista helped Apple to rise, not caused Apple to rise.

Now, if you put W7 and Leopard side by side, it is hard to tell them apart. If anything, this should help to introduce the Apple interface to users, and at that point, why not just get the UNIX version of Windows 7?

dream on windows 7 is just vista reloaded microsoft has obviously forgotten what the point of an operating system is...

Ubuntu lacks the corporate quality but its best whats its made for. FREE SOFTWARE!!! Look this is a developer based OS, Face it its not the next big thing you'll see on every computer, buts its something that will be on every geeks machine. Ubuntu is something for all tech nerds, true its gonna be a little or a lot difficult using it for some people. But its fit for the people who want hassle free OS. Ubuntu makes your machine into what its made for. It wont make it one big advertise like some ahem....MS....MAC. Windows 7 is shitty I don't know why any one who loves quality performance would use it (and Im on the beta on it right now so i know what Im talking about.) Eye Candy...? More like The loli pop thats been stuck on my desk for a year candy. Its nothing different than Vista( well some new bits of shyt..) MS needs a new OS with a whole new approach. Windows used to be this great Operating system but, Linux and Mac, grew up and put everything windows lacked and had problems with. The only thing windows Is for is people who love entertainment. Wait when next gen Developers come into the industry and entertainment will be delivered into every OS. Windows was like Japanese cars but now its Turning into like the dead General Motors

I tried the 32 bit on a real archaic machine: Celeron 800Mhz, 765MB Ram, 32MB video.
Installed as a charm - no interaction whatsoever. As it went to a second disk, upon boot, prompted for version to run(XP installed on main drive). Works as fast as XP.
Issues - no drivers for a plain network card, can't run some of the games - no 3D on video, but nothing else. Firefox runs fine, so does IE.
PC Rated at 1 i.e. video card, memory, CPU. Disk rated at 5.1 a regular old fashioned 20GB 7200RPM disk.
System tools launch relatively fast and system overall very responsive.
Granted, played with it for a few days only, but still, a pleasant surprise it ran at all.

This win-7 runs as vista should have.
not particularily well or bad.
but good enough. Perf ok, a tad slower than linux. Especially the 3D 1st person shooter runs definitely slower than wine-linux or win-XP.

- Eye candy compared to compiz not very impressive considering there's millions of USD in front of one's face. Network discovery is still sluggish, as always. MS, fix it. it does not have to be this way......

Most negative issue for me: Compared to my "normal" workplace (opensuse 11) it takes huge amounts of time to get it setup. (MS office on linux is the only thing I need to do extra, everything else is in the box and gets installed rightaway....). I spent +3 hrs, compared to opensuse 11 install of less than 1.5 hrs.

Some drivers missing, of course....

(64bit version of win-7)
- no drivers for older pctv-sattelite card, or compat with XP version....
- no way i can get my voodoo-3dfx emulation running (it does on wine, wihtout even a performance penalty). So I would have to abandon a couple of old favourite games.....

Runs fine in virtualbox (64bit mode) so I guess it will do just that for the visio app and that is it..

rg

I've got Windows 7 and Ubuntu installed, both 64bit. What strikes me is that I only have ONE app on Ubuntu which runs in 32bit, and that's Google Earth (which I barely use).

I installed 64bit Windows7, and realised that that almost every app I needed was not available as 64bit. Chrome proves that 32bit emulation also fails at the best of times. On Ubuntu, I run Fireferret and Flash all 64bit. Neither is available for VoleOS7.

As for the netbook, I'm keeping Ubuntu. Windows7 probably won't even fit on an 8GB SSD. That's a LOT of bloat for a core OS.

I find this article interesting, first it on inquirer, so it's half sarcasm, however it was also oddly supportive. having spent some unfortunate time in vista and some not as unfortunately but still unfortunate time in windows 7 or as state above windows vista sp2, i don't see whats so great. The task bar is so so, welcome to playing catch up. But kill linux on the desktop, no, not that its moving anywhere fast. As for stopping OSX momentum, i doubt it. Linux on the desktop appeals to counter culture and geeks, osx to people who like to get work done and not be so geeky, and windows to the mostly uneducated and stuck in the rut gaming sort. basically they'll all live, as for me i'll make opensolaris my home, okay that was inquirer style comment. either way there is nothing new or neat about windows 7, its vista, with a new name and slightly updated, so if you have a pc and are scared of linux, it will kind of bring you up to speed. if paid the premium, not really a tax, for a mac, well your not missing anything. just my two cents.

I think the author is a SB

@Felix

It is not “built around DRM” regardless of all the internet conspiracy theories - including that whacko from NZ, and the Inq’s own Charlie. The APIs for DRM are ONLY activated by calls to DRM functions, which are ONLY made by applications requesting specific DRM controlled services. MS have detailed all of this on the Ch-9 site, in interviews with people like Mark Russinovich, and still people continue with these conspiracy theories, as if their are facts. The reality is that it’s the RIAA that dictates the DRM issue, and you either need to support it, or not provide any access to DRM protected content. Secondly, you can’t FORCE people to be users instead of admins (even putting aside the issue of it being their choice) as there is a huge backlog of code that has come from the DOS/Win world... where Admin privs is the equivalent to the assumed full access rights. The step that MS took a hit on, was actually quite courageous... they copped a HUGE amount of flack for highlighting (perhaps, in an over-the-top manner) those apps which developers have been too slack to fix and/or migrate correctly to the NT security environment. Forcing users reduce their privs is not a solution of the apps won’t support it... coercing the developers to change their apps and support user privs is what’s required.

Doesn't change the fact that Windows hasn't been a true OS since 3.1.
That is why it has security problems and that is why it will eventually fail in it's current form.
Unix and it's various flavors will eventually become what we will all use on our cell/desk with the advent of complete cloud processing/networking because that is what it was designed to do.
Windows failure is over-engineering, K.I.S.S. as they say...

At least 25 crashes since installing the 32 bit version of 7 yesterday. My rating is 3 due to my 80GB SATA2 HD, figure that. Video is near 8 with 8800GTS. 2GB of Crucial Balistix rates close to 6. CPU is 3800X2. The weakness in my hardware is my motherboard Asrock 780 (I have a Phenom 9850 sitting on a shelf because the board won't run it).

I have installed Firefox, BOINC and AVAST. Nero7 won't install and Avast doesn't run anymore.

It is dumb to install a 64bit OS on a machine with 2GB RAM. If you want 64bit you should have at least 8GB RAM to make any good use of 64bit system.

I've ran 64bit Vista for a long time on Dual-core AMD and now dual-core Intel machine. It is fast enough for generic use and gaming. No blue screen on Vista on this current Intel-based machine (C2D E8400, 8800GTS 512, 8GB DDR2, 3x SATA HDD)

I just installed Windows 7 Beta 1 64bit version and the new OS feels kinda fast compared to Vista. It is more responsive and so far I like it.

... from the gifted bunch of writers that from The Inq. All we need now is Charlie Angryman... sorry Demerjian to write a follow-up. No facts, the most subjective statements man can utter, and the most laughable conclusions to boot.

This site is now becoming the laughing stock of the IT rag world. Get some good writers back on your staff, for goodness sake...

" .. but it seems that Windows 7 leans on the hard-drive in a way that Microsoft has not made public. "

Windows has always leaned on the HDD, move the swap off C:\ and windows slows down, split it between two drives and it's happy.

No matter how much ram you have, windows will always use the swap drive, I have 3GB on x64 with often 2GB free yet the swap is using 1GB of HDD

Like Linux is not already dead on the desktop? LOL

Not long ago we were hearing that there was no Linux on the desktop, and there never would be. Now, it seems that Windows is trying to fight back and "kill" Linux on the desktop, which is just another was to admit that Linux does own desktop real estate, and Windows Vista did in fact lose a lot of ground in the past year.

You are slipping Windows fanbois and you know it.

Keep snorting the vaporware, hope for that next big comeback, while over at the scoreboard Linux just keeps on growing and growing.

Oh yeah, and by all means keep trotting out those tired old arguments. No one listened last year, but these things do take time. Just. Believe.

What makes you believe linux on the desktop was even alive?

... because if we are honest the Linux desktop really doesn't exist other than in the minds of few die hard nerds.

Linux is not going away anytime soon. Why? Because it is in Google's interest that as many people as possible have access to the internet so that they can grow their online advertising business. Vole's computer tax cannot be paid by everyone, particularly those in the 3rd world. Microsoft and Apple are for 1st world households. Google's business model has a vested interest in free or cheap operating-systems like Linux so that more people can connect to the net. They developed the Android platform (based on Linux) for mobile devices for this exact purpose. Further aside, Google's services are powered by Linux clusters. Google will continue to sponsor and finance various open source projects that make up the Linux/GNU OS. Linux will not disappear and will go from strength to strength. It will only disappear from fickle users' hard-drives in 1st world countries, such as yourself.

yep yawn.

More Linux "officonados" crawl out the woodwork to comment on a tongue in cheek title....

One day we will work out how to kick these childish foolish people out of the Linux community. Sadly it hasb't happened yet.

OMG OMG.... how terrible, M$ are the baddies.... yawn.

I'm getting fed up of it.

Microsoft should realize that they should give away their flagship OS for free for individual users, and charge only corporations.

Who would bother for expensive Apple, if every cheap PC, came with free Microsoft flagship OS.

They fight piracy these days, but widespread piracy actually helped them to gather such a large user base, that almost every second homo sapiens knows what Windows is.

"After years of working on XP and Ubuntu you forget what a decent graphics interface looks like. Vole has spent some money on it and it has several features that make it easy to navigate." - Both Gnome and KDE are easier to work with than Windows. As for eye candy - Compiz Fusion anyone?!? Its superior to both MS and Apple's attempts.

Complaining about flakey IE in a beta is a bit much really, if you read the release notes itstates that the IE used is an early beta of IE8, earlier than the one that is currently released for public beta.

WHAT A CRAB ARTICLE.
COMPARING A VOLKSWAGEN WITH A BULLET OR A PAPRIKA WITH AN ONION LEADS TO FUNDAMENTALISTIC OPINIONS.
HAVE YOUR LAST MEAL AT MC DONALDS AND THAN SPRING FROM THE HIGHEST BRIDGE FROM WHEREEVER YOU SPEND YOUR PATHTHIC EXISTENCE, YOUR CAREER AS JOURNALIST IS HEREBY DECLARED OVER.
I LOST SOME OF MY VALUABLE TIME WITH THIS SH##.

@MR.BIG: You've lost your CAPS key too?

Let me guess... a tipical raging Apple fanboy? :)

Twaddle complete and utter rubbish.

Have a look at elive or even Ultimate edition 2 just as configurable and you have a complete file and mail server in under 1 hr.

I am evaluating Windows 7 now and yes its good but it aint no Linux killer.

Windows XP forever.......

It's pretty obvious Nick fails at writing an article in terms of actually providing evidence - benchmarks etc.

That's why he is using "Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop" to get attention on this site and on others.

Please if you're going to use sensationalist headlines come up with something worth reading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

Go forth and learn.

Slept through third grade English did you.

"The point of Linux" is to allow Windows to continue to be popular by demonstrating to the masses how unworkable Linux is.

the way windows 7 is looking right now i doubt it will shake linux too much...

linux is epic and that is that ;)

Warning : Personnal Attacks incoming !

Just the title says it 'kill Linux'. As if Freedom can be killed that easily... I do not need to read the article, just that proves that the writer is a fucking idiot as well as the douchebags who coded that website with their toes.

*Complain About ALL Comments*

Look at all this flame posting, you guys are all clearly Windows Haters and you should just jump from your perch before you get knocked off, not that said perch is very high; and definitely not that said perch is higher than Windows.

People use Windows because they WANT to, not because they choose to... Windows is far better to roll out for companies, is far better for new comers to the PC and is far better for regular users.

I have used every version of Windows since NT (4.0) and I have also used every version of Ubuntu since 5, just to keep checking on it. Ubuntu does nothing good with its time, there is nothing on it that helps me in any way, or that Windows can't do better. I have never experienced anything related to DRM and my computer is not some piss-shit PC that'll slow to a crawl on Vista.

Yes, Microsoft made Vista a resource hog, but if all you idiots were stuck on middle age machines, you'd be able to experience WHAT A GREAT OPERATING SYSTEM WINDOWS VISTA IS.

I am currently in the Windows 7 x64 beta and it's great, it's Vista with better than XP performance, all my games run faster, applications open (and run) quicker and it feels like it should be taking up more resources, but it doesn't.

So I conclude that I don't care about Vista, it's an old argument... But if Microsoft released Windows 7 correctly, it'll kill Mac and Linux.

MS should just have "Windows 7 Home" and "Windows 7 Business". And possibly a "Windows 7 Trial" - there's a nice sales pitch MS.

I might like windows but it doesn't mean I have to like this article. I'm fully aware microsoft do come out with a lot of good products, and windows 7 may be wonderful, myself I'm yet to try it as i'd prefer to wait until it's a little more mature before giving it a lookover (being in beta and all.) That's just my 2 cents.

*IF* Microsoft were ever to make a product that doesn't suck, it would be a vacuum cleaner.

So far the only 3 things they ever got right were: printing, NTFS, and DHCP. The rest is all crap.

what is this vole you speak of?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060622091308AAmq3Uf

http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.php?tid=13769

If you knew what compiz fusion was you would know better than windows looks better than any nix distro. Also you will still be running same insecure by design windows api, same api dude for how long now. You think crackers haven't already scoped that 7 beta. Go ahead and use windows 7 and get owned like most westerners, chump.

I know this equation has an answer.

Windows = $$$$
+
Linux = Download
_______________

?????

Windows7 is just like Mandrvia 2008. Now I am using MandrivaLinux2009 ,it is much better than Windows7! Try KDE! Why does windows be like KDE , not gnome? Because KDE is better than windows!

Oh NO, plz dont kill Linux!

vole explanation by Inq's egan, quote :- "The scientific name of the common vole is "Microtus arvalis Pallas".

My own view is that this appellation is rather apt. The vole is a tiny rodent that's almost uniquely single-minded in the pursuit of its prey, because its metabolism is so very high that it must eat more than its own weight every day in order to survive. It's also a ubiquitous garden pest and like all rodents is prone to carry some rather nasty diseases." sound about right for M$hite ?? :O)

Linux works in a very limited way???
Huh?
Have you ever used it?

Ubuntu is a fine beginner distro.
But it is Linux with training wheels.

woah does anyone expected such a response?
anyway my pointless comment is going to be ignored anyway

This article is nothing more than an intend to either attract the "Vole" as customer or to payback advertisement.

MS is already on its worst nightmare and it is not stopping. With windows vista they gave people reasons to try something else, some people did, and a lot of them (me included) liked the change...

Why would I be paying a hundreds of dollars for an OS that does not gives you real advantages over the competition as your main personal desktop OS? Why will you be paying so much for something you don't really need for anything other than playing games and installing apps that are windows exclusive?.

I've not read anything but good things about 7, and I was pretty exited when I installed. I used it, really tried to enjoy the experience but I ended up going back to Ubuntu, just did not feel the need to replace something that so far has been the most complacent OS experience I've ever had.

I also concluded that the whole thing was the GUI. The power you get with Compiz-Fusion just blows away any other GUI other out there. For some reason, MS have not tried to implement something like this so far. Sure the multitouch capabilities of 7 are very good, but is nothing Linux can't offer already.

Good try Microsoft, is just too late for you.

Wol: buy an ASUS Eee PC 1000H. It has Linux and Windows version and the Linux version is cheaper. They have the same hardware, with HDD.

Seems Linux fans have no idea about the world outside their consolas... Linux on the desktop? Yeah, right!

Oh, and this Compiz blah blah... what's this ultra ugly and unusable peace of #@$@#?

"enough to kill Linux on the desktop" ha ha haa tee hee giggle giggle ROFL ha ha he he he giggle titter ha ha heh ROFL...

OOps I think I wet myself abit over that one....

best laugh of 2009 so far.

Windows 7 is just expensive poo...

Ubuntu is free, and it works...

"kill linux on the desktop" oh how we laughed....

Nick Farrell: Amazing imagination you have, have you thought of writing fiction? oh wait... you already are...

Have you ever used a computer before you write that comment today?

Hmm,
10 years ago this article might have been true. Unfortunately (or fortunately) most users of computers are now much more savvy - e.g. they can spot a duff product when they use it.
Clearly, Vista is a bad product. So our more informed users insisted on purchasing XP, or Apple or (for the more adventurous - Linux for free). Microsoft had to give in and keep on shipping XP to stop a full run to an alternative OS.
In this brave new world, consumers now can make a difference therefore why should they all pay to adopt another OS from Microsoft - they won't because they didn't last time and MS will end up support 3 OS.
The only thing stopping large corporates from changing is that they got themselves locked in to desktop driven applications, with .net, vba and the office applications - Opps.
Most now have a strategy for change - as they have learnt these costly lessons. It wont be on this refresh cycle MS will be in trouble but the next.

It never ends. One group of OS supporters claims the others groups choice of OS sucks. After years of debate nothing gets resolved and the conflicts often just repeat themselves. On the upside it provides an easy target for the blogs.

In this instance we are talking about one OS made by a large corporation that uses FUD, bullying and strong arm tactics to maintain its monopoly, buys up competing companies and products to lessen competition in the market place. Tries to lock in suppliers and hardware manufacturers to the exclusion of all others.

The other OS is free made by the contribution of talented individuals freely given expertise to make a product that ultimately delivers what users want rather than what the corporation wants you have.

Why anyone would want to be locked into one corporate supplier and dance to their tune and proverbially kiss their arse while that corporation empties their bank account and limits their choices is a mystery to me.

There is no question that Ubuntu Linux is a better desktop operating system here compared to the "broken OS", the only question we should be asking is why are developers tieing themselves into Microsoft and making their product dependant on sales of windows.

The answer is because generally they are frightened to take the lead because of the dominance of Microsoft, which could put them out of business at a stroke.

This dominance and choice limiting environment will be eroded as people take up the use of free opertating systems like Ubuntu. As that day approaches things can only get better.

We already have openoffice,, "somethingfunny" above hit the nail on the head, developers should be thinking of open platforms for their products for the widest possible audience.

Microsoft has put considerable effort into commercial programs like "games for windows", this is explicitly to delay the inevitable introduction of games that ship with a Linux OS, and run from the CD, not requiring any Microsoft baggage to run.

Again when that day finally arrives we all have more choice and more money in our pockets.

In 2001, the Linux desktop situation was sad. We had Windows XP, and we had... a sad thing that couldn't even load scalable fonts properly (FreeType 2 was buggy as hell), mount removable devices (you need a lobotomy to think that # mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom is easier than popping the CD into the drive) nor manage a battery properly. In 2005 to load Linux in a portable machine was an afterthought. Now, in 2008, you CAN finally use Linux desktops. 2009 will bring us KDE 4.3, reaching feature and eye candy parity with Windows Seven, and some advances in the distro field. So it won't be so easier. Windows XP had to fight a joke of desktop operating system. Windows Seven will have to fight a less reputable, but capable desktop system, matching Seven novelty by novelty. It will be interesting.

I think we really need to find an operating system that does not suck.

"Have you ever used a computer before you write that comment today?"

Ofc not! I was spending years reading this wall of text (logs) trying to find out why our amazing Linux dev server at work is randomly stoping random services and why the so amazing MySQL hangs completelly if you try to execute some query with say 6 left joins. Also was spending hours and hours debugging PHP apps with var_dump because the whole LAMP stack is living in like 1980 and the term "debuger" is unknown. And all this from a mighty Linux "desktop" mashine. And to make the things better, our admin decided to install this compwiz crap - God! my eyes started to bleed after 1 hour watching these windows jump around... sigh!

So no, i had no time to use a real computer/OS recently :)

If you have that much trouble from a dev linux server its obviously been set up incorrectly.

Our Linux boxes many of which run LAMP platform certainly don't cause any trouble at all.

On the other hand I can't moan too much about windows servers as I earn good money constantly propping them up after they fall over...

So my advice to you would be to call in an expert, because Linux boxes do not cause the kind of trouble you are describing.

Of course I can fix it for you, but you would have to get your cheque book out first.

did you not see ozzy's <sarcasm POST</sarcasm tags?

Wow, look at all these fanboys (MS & NIX)!

Let's face facts, if you can afford the latest and greatest hardware and software then by all means buy Windows 7 and yet another new box.

Otherwise, perhaps you would like to consider the fact that not everyone gives two hoots about how an OS looks. It's really all about if it does what it says on the tin. XP does. Linux does.

I personally like CentOS for web development, and XP for gaming (although Gaming for Windows is a stinking mess of xbox code).

I don't need or want anything more than that. I don't want Vista or 7, I don't want OSX. I'm happy with what I've got (except for the annoying matter of 4GB of RAM being transmuted to 3GB on my 32bit systems).

Credit-Crunch Computing. Keep those low funds in your pocket and not in some manufacturers', for the time-being at least.

Oh yeah, we have another so called "admin" here. Fix your own server zombie processes first maybe? :))

BTW, i'm by no means MS fanboy. But, talking about "Linux on desktop" is a nonsense. And, all the "Vista is crap blah blah" crap... actually Linux gained nothing after Vista (OSX gained). So, nothing really changed for Linux, which is sad.

And yes, Linux is far from perfect too.

"linux on the desktop is a nonsense".

I vehemently disagree with this comment.

I have plenty of clients who use Linux on the desktop across the board in their companies. Many of those companies are highly successful.

To say its a nonsense indicates a lack of investigation or research into the subject.

My analysis would agree with 99flake. To say that Linux gained nothing following Vistas flop is another unresearched claim. OSX may have gained, but guess what OSX is BSD Unix, and has much closer links to Linux than windows.

Ubuntu desktop linux is gaining momentum, and on this current refresh of Vista to windows 7 is where most sensible business should be looking for non microsoft alternatives to unhook them from this Microsoft pay and upgrade repetitive cycle.

The process has already started, but will take a few more years to gain significant speed and market share.

"...where most sensible business should be looking for non microsoft alternatives to unhook them from this Microsoft pay and upgrade repetitive cycle..."

They can't. Talking about the enterprise, it is not about the client machines only. Some scenarios: A new Linux fan: Hey boss, look at my cool Ubuntu laptop! Boss: Oh, nice. Can i enforce the domain policy on him? LinuxFan: Ermm... no. Boss: Ok, take it at home and sit on your XP here.

These scenarios are countless - Exchange, AD, Office, etc. dependancies.

And seeing all the buzz about Windows 2008 (which i think is really good), it is most likely most of the enterprise users will upgrade than swithing the infrastructure to linux.

One of the first things you learn in Journalism, is to be any kind of self respecting Journalist you don't express your own opinions, but rather only the facts and let the reader come up with there own. How ever we have not Had proper Journalism in this country for quite sometime its about selling papers and getting web or TV hits which moves us to the sensationalism that so called "journalist" banter us with on a daily basis, hot button topics, and crude overstatements designed to do nothing more than stir up a controversies. So I do agree it's time for a career change my friend. GET A JOB YOUR GOOD AT.

"...group policy..."

You see: your stuck in Windows mode, try thinking about NFS, NIS and NIS plus and LDAP. All that active directory is, is a Microsoft "remix" of LDAP, nothing more, its not new, its not special, it was already there, Microsoft just dressed it up with a glossy brochure and few proprietry lock-ins.

If you think in terms of LDAP, NIS, NIS Plus and NFS, all these controls are then possible. Group Policy is a Microsoft invention to try to control a weak and uncontrollable desktop machine, where the inherent insecurities in the desktop OS need to band-aid repaired, a bit like papering over the cracks. Its a Microsoft tool to help with an exclusively Microsoft generated problem.

In a full unix environment : client and server. all this Microsoft invented baggage is as irrelevant as it is unecessary...

Couple this with cloud style computing where the apps run on a server and access them over a web browser style environment and suddenly your group policies and desktop lock downs do look rather irrelevant.

Windows 2008 might look "rather good" but its just more layers of complexity designed to try and make the unmanageable manageable and thereby itself becoming over complex and uneccessary, its laden with proprietry "features", its difficult to secure and its saddled with expensive licensing baggage and its not open source.

Why would you want this? Think outside the box...

What do you actually need to run a business these days? Email, office applications and maybe a few specialist apps particular to your industry.

If you think you need your server 2008 for that, its like thinking you need a DVD and TV player in your car to drive to the shops. Once you're in that mode, you can't drive anywhere without a TV repair man and DVD specialist on hand, and then you can't use your car unless you have a TV license... sound familiar... EULAs Microsoft licensing, features no one needs, upgrade cycle... all uneccesary.

I would say "you can't afford not to go to Linux", and many of my clients have and have more money to spend doing fun stuff...

You wrote a whole new article on the history of LDAP but still missed the point? "What do you actually need to run a business these days" The enterprise need all their existing applications + all their existing huge databases/logs + all their existing infrastructure up and running. What they don't need? To spend months moving everithing to a new platform, disrupting the workflow. Start thinking outside your repair shop maybe? Bah, there are still mainframe mashines up and runnig. Know why? Because the big company can't afford to move the database, disrupting his internal processes. Oh, and training a few thousend ppl actually nilifies the benefits of the "freebie" OS :) And with Windows adoption in the enterprise of around 94%... go figure.

We can see a few home enthusiasts running Ubuntu, but that is. If Linux fail to make it into the entersprise (with big numbers), the term "Linux on desktop" will be nonsense.

Nick is what you call your typical "Linux-Poser". (Not a fanboy like he claims).

That is, he thinks he's part of the Linux crowd by using Ubuntu (LOL! Good one!) and talks negatively about Microsoft on occasion...Until he can be enticed back into the land of the Vole. (Like he is now)

A real Linux user wouldn't care what upcoming products that Microsoft (or anyone else) has. They don't care for market share; financial goals; shareholders; Economic climate, etc. These are merely trivial matters.

Because they know the whole idea of open source software is an eventuality.

The logic is simple: You can't compete with someone who give people software out for $0 indefinitely. (Its something Microsoft or Apple cannot do. This is due to the simple fact that they are both businesses with shareholders to please and financial goals to achieve. They are not communities of world wide developers, and volunteers).

What a full blown Linux fanboy cares about, is improving Linux. Period. He/she knows if they take part, they help improve for all who are involved.

If there is a bug, problem, or some deficiency that needs to be addressed, they go after it with enthusiasm. (People who do things for the love of it, are often most successful in the end).

At best, Nick has continued the proud tradition of The Inquirer with sensational headlines and UK based humour that most people don't quite get.

I must say though, its a wonderfully subjective article Nick! Bravo! I especially love the headline! That'll get the readership fired up, eh? ;-)

I only use MS OS' for my job(IT Software Technical Support - no, not helpdesk, I support corporate technical customers). I obtained copies of Win7 from MS, to see what this new "kid on the block" had to offer.

I have a 64bit capable system, with 4TB of SATA HDD's, 8GB RAM, ATI HD4870X2(2GB) graphics. Installation went okay, and completed reasonably quickly. Then the disappointment, although at the "tail-end" of the installation it stated it was "fine tuning my optimum resolution". The system started in VGA mode(800x600), using the "VGASave" default driver. ATI "preview" & "beta" drivers for the graphics cards install - successfully according to the installation logs. But at IPL the first thing I see is a pop-up stating "No ATI device found ... etc.." Highest resolution on a 26" monitor is 1600x1200, and on a 30" monitor it is 1920x1440 - bit well below their capabilities

I also use Mandriva2009 PWP(64bit) on this system and whilst "out of the box" it does not have drivers for the HD4870X2 card, it does have drivers which will support both 26" & 30" monitors to their full capabilities.

As for how it handles on all other counts ..... Well not really any better than XP, a few visual tweaks here and there - Explorer, Control Panel, etc.. But in terms of "does it do better than XP?" .......... I have to say no, it doesn't. It's not a bad OS, but also it isn't "good", and it certainly is NOT a Linux, or Mac OS X beater

In addition to my previous entry. There are other problem areas for the MS "devotee", although I guess they are well used to them by now. For starters, this could mean new hardware - yet again. But more worrying is the potential need to buy newer versions of your favourite apps. Although I only use MS OS' for work, I do buy some of the tools necessary to keep XP "out of trouble" - ZoneLabs Security Suite, Diskeeper2008 Pro - neither install. Skype - whilst it will install, constantly reminds the user of "compatibility issues" Coupled with MS being the most expensive OS out there, all adds up to this being a "huge" outlay for the average family.

Since I have worked on Sequent OS's, Sun OS, IBM OS's, Microsoft OS's and Linux OS's at different times for the last 20 years, its clear what the future is going to be:
There is only such much money that can be thrown at badly thought out operating system. Microsoft have great products but the OS is the major stumbling block.

Essentially the problem is that Microsoft are running products on DOS, with the massive limitations in performance that comes with that original foundation. No amount of wonderfully beautiful GUIs will overcome the fact they are still running on DOS.

SQL is a database standard and *newsflash* they don't go away when they change operating system.

My advice would be all those people who have "specialised" in Microsoft products now should go away and retrain on all the different things so that they have those options.

These are the issues, I am in the fortunate position of having 20years of experience of a huge variety of OS, and its obvious that Microsoft OS's are constructed around the maximisation of License fee revenue. Microsoft OS's have major flaws, in performance, security and longevity.

Mate... "essentially the problem is that Microsoft are running products on DOS". Ermmm... don't know how to react to this one, LOL. How the hell a 64bit OS can run on DOS?!??!!??! Stunned! This efectivelly killed your reputation. RIP :))

Another one: "SQL is a database standard and *newsflash* they don't go away when they change operating system". Haha.. another gem! Newsflash: SQL is query language and nothing more :) Ehh, do you have a clue how a DB is being migrated? And i mean a real DB, not some joke like MySQL. Do you have a clue how the transaction log and all other logs are being migrated? No? Because you're home MySQL don't have these at all? Do you have a clue about the amount of DB fields which are incompatible among the major DB server vendors? Mate, stop talking these #$%#. Get a clue :) LOL

Hello?! It is 2009, WTF you're talking about? Are all NIX fanboys are that off? "Microsoft OS's have major flaws, in performance, security and longevity". Lets see, how many OSs passed the strawberry fields forever: UNIX is declining big day, OS/2 is dead, NetWare is dead, NeXt is dead... there are more. With your "20 y experience" (yeah, right) you should remeber these. "Security"... well, you know what the God Father, Linus Torval said about all the security obsessed idiots around: "Don't glorify the security "monkeys" (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9993157-16.html). And if i remember correctly, it was a MacBook that some guys hacked 100% for about 5 minutes a few mounths ago? As the guy stackoverflow said, get a clue. Working with NIX in your garage is not enough.

stackoverflow is correct here. A DB migration is a pain. You can add to the list all the procedures, functions, triggers, views, variables, cursor declarations, conditional and control statements, etc. Not to mention all the SQL dialect specific (PL/SQL, Transact-SQL) features. There are some tools floating around, but these are either very expensive or not working at all.

I am not a computer 'geek'. I don't know all of the ins and outs of a computer. But, I can build my own system from scratch. I have used many flavors of Linux and Windows in the past. I settled on Ubuntu because it works out of the box.

I don't have to add virus protection, firewalls, burning software, word processing software, maintenance software, decent image viewers and all the other different things to make my computer run smoothly. Ubuntu has all of these things built in. And, guess what... It's free.

I bought an Asus eeePC 1000h last week which had XP pre-installed. It kept crashing on me. Took about 2 hours each time to re-install everything back onto the laptop. Did this about 3 or 4 times in 3 days because the thing was having problems. Finally got tired of it and installed eeeBuntu. (Flavor of Ubuntu made for eeePC) 45 minutes later, it works perfectly. Everything works.

I don't think Windows will ever kill Linux. Why? Because Linux is free and it works...

We're running Ubuntu - it runs all our hardware and it runs fast on 512 MB of RAM. There is nothing we want to do on a PC that we cannot do.

Why would I want to pay hundreds of dollars for worse security, have to upgrade my RAM (2 GB was slowing Win7 down???) and upgrade the rest of my hardware for something that is no where near as good?

Makes no sense to me.

MAC is abandoning DRM even in iTunes. Will microsoft abandon draconian abuse of users at the home desktop? No? Then no sale.

Will microsoft develop a 64bit OS and abandon the x86 legacy? no? then no sale

media piracy is already illegal. making it illegal will not stop those who opt to be soft pirates. more causal users are being more media savvy.

Windows 7: defective by design

microsoft draconia will sink microsoft sales

SH

windows 7 will kill linux is the funniest thing i have heard in a while.

yeah maybe if win 7 was something built from the ground up, but it is vista with a skin on it. Just like vista is XP with a skin. Man what is Microsoft going to do when Win 7 flops just like Vista did?

"Just like vista is XP with a skin". You're realy clueless, are you?

you say Windows 7 is slow, buggy, and unstable, with software that doesn't run properly, and then conclude that it's better than Linux.

if this wasn't an American website, I'd think you were being ironic ;-)

Come on guys we all know windows is built on DOS, lets not pretend otherwise...

And don't nit-pic over SQL databases and definitions implied or skewed from the grammar (@stackover et al), we all know who the real winner is here, and while you multiple choice MCSE boys are busy installing your latest GUI widget to plug another deficiency in the Microsoft OS, those that made the smart move to a unix environment earlier will have enough spare cash, yielded from being free of Microsoft licensing, to retire.

So while you Microsoft masochists are busy patching this and that and upgrading and relicensing and not to mention re-booting, the rest of us will be on a beach somewhere, have bigger houses and better cars and more time off....

Choose your poison but don't make yourselves look even more stupid by picking holes in sentence constructs to imply different meanings.

Databases are trivial to be made platform independent, and call windows what you like it has its foundations in DOS along with all the crap that went with that.

Read it and weep...

I'll be on the beach sipping cocktails... long before you've installed service pack 25a for Windows 2012....

ROFL...

Vista can't windows XP with a skin...

its waaaaayyyy to crap and slow for that...

Windows 7 is still vista with a little of ths sh*t removed...

Its all built on DOS so who gives a crap.

How they ever managed to make it all run soooo slllooowwwwlllllyyy is unbelievable.

"Come on guys we all know windows is built on DOS, lets not pretend otherwise" Nope. DOS is 16 bit. Get your fact straight. Otherwise... you're just a clueless troll :)

"Databases are trivial to be made platform independent" Yeah, like you're moving dabases from DB2 to Oracle or SQL server every day? Dude, stop it. You're looking like an idiot now :)

"...those that made the smart move to a unix environment earlier... " And again, you're messing Unix with Linux, But it is normal for trolls :) Unix is on steady decline for the past few years, so those who moved to Unix earlier are the loosers actually :)

And these "waaaaayyyy", "slllooowwwwlllllyyy"... dude, why you're so sad and angry? Need more coctails? EMO? LOL

How old are you? 12?

This is quite amusing....

@thral, you are confused, this is a grown ups discussion, you're on the wrong forum... (hint Cbeebies in google).

@ozzy and the others...

This is just great to watch, never have I seen such a collection of microsoft miss-fits bleat on so much about so little.

This is about making money, if you truly believe you will become wealthier and make your clients wealthier by installing licensing driven, poor quality, bug ridden insecure, expensive microsoft products, go ahead...

I won't be recommending them, and my clients will benefit from the years of experience that tells them when to avoid a Microsoft product.

CHOICE is the buzzword.

Any body seen Windows RG?

I think this epitomises Microsoft OS's very succinctly...

I'll carry on with Centos and Ubuntu, while all you MS boffins are rebooting...

To be honest I was using Vista and changed completely to Linux on the desktop. We'd been running Linux on our servers since 1995, but it didn't really work on the desktop - now with Ubuntu its really the end of MS dominance.
We'd rather use an operating system with a pedigree going back to the late 1960s designed for multi-user, parallel, multi-tasking than some server operating system that is based on a 1980s diskless operating system.
The manageability of Unix based OSes just completely trounces MS Oses. Most of the management one does in a MS environment is because of the complex layers MS have introduced to make up for the poor quality of the underlying OS - and its unsuitability for most installations.

Supertiger is right on the money here.

Choose your poison, a morbidly obese operating system with a price tag to match the food bill, or a sleek fast one thats free...

If you're a fat overweight bastard that life stuffing his face, then choose the OS to match ( V-I-S-T-A )

I really think that the MS boys seem to be getting upset about this because Linux takes them out of their comfort zone.
Most of the Linux boys seem to know their stuff - MS and Linux.
I think this is because Linux people generally understand IT whilst the MS crowd are a product of MS training.
When did you last see an MS server used in a mission critical back office function - probably never !
You probably have seen a LOT of UNIX and you will see more LINUX in the future. The Linux people save money and getting it on the desktop is going to save even more money - thats it MCSE - get ready to really learn something about computing.

Can you really imagine MCSE people trying to learning about computing?:

1)Yes
2)No
3)All of the above...

I am just waiting for a repise of the

"Its not built on DOS so there i'm going to tell my mum about you, nasty Linux man..."

All 100 ppl in the world who use Linux on their desktop gathered here. Hmmm, there should be something in this article :)

Ahhh, it seems lots of mobs are talking about MCSE (most likely they are the same person tho - split personality). Have you all failed the exams?

"failed the exams",

Oh cd,, what a jolly wag you are... and you still don't get it?

MCSE lost any shred of credibility it may have once had when the TCP/IP part was "retired" by Microsoft.

Now why would that be? Hmmm, everything runs on it, its essential for almost all networks worldwide, the internet runs on it, every installation you could possibly dream up with all your forests and domains uses it... now why would they take it out....

Oh yes, thats it, once you've passed it, its not upgraded every year so microsoft can't keep charging you every year to take it again....

No money=No use to microsoft

Riddle me that one oh MCSE "gurus"

And what MCSE have to do with the article? Only you (and your alts, itsallover, etc.) is talking about MCSE. Oh the old TCP/IP stuff... let me guess, you've failed the supernetting scenarios?

I can't understand why anybody would pay to take M$ exams - let alone fail them.
I remember the days when M$ discovered that there was a network let alone the Internet.

Perhaps you need a piece of paper to wave at an employer in the vain hope they might overlook the fact you don't actually know anything???

The rest of us go on experience, and knowledge gained over the years.

MCSE was invented to generate revenue initially but it has spawned a whole plethora of technical wannabes who desparately needed to have something to cling to.

If anyone actually lets you near a Unix system, your multiple choice MCSE book will be useful to stand on so you can reach the keyboard in the rack.

"Perhaps you need a piece of paper to wave at an employer in the vain hope they might overlook the fact you don't actually know anything". No, sorry. I'm an employer myself. "The rest of us go on experience, and knowledge gained over the years." The rest of who? Looking on all your comments above, it is clear you're just a forum troll. You're far away from the ppl with real knowledge, both MS and Linus guys, that's why you're moving the discussion off topic - MCSE, blah...blah...

The defence of the Microsoft company and platform here is quite extraordinary. Looking back throught the comments the MCSE theme was only originally used as a generalisation MS fanbois.

@CD you seem intent of chucking around personal insults such as "forum troll" amongst other terms, and not actually participating in any discussion either humerous or technically valid points.

If you are an employer, as you claim, then your apparent closed mindedness, coupled with your willingness to defend a company such as Microsoft which has been proven to engage in anti competitive practices is quite extraordinary. I would envisage the entre-prenaural type of employer who wants to have a thriving business with USPs would jump at the chance of unshacking themselves from Microsoft.

Obviously, unlike some others commenting here, you have an "also ran" business based on being a Microsoft partner. Which ultimately will limit your companies diversity, profit margins and leaving indeed employing an army of borg-like MCSE's

Perhaps you like to share your company name so that we can make a note to avoid it in the future, as typically I wouldn't want to work either with or for anyone displaying the traits you have revealed here.

"CD you seem intent of chucking around personal insults". Nah! Just scroll a few post above and you'll see the guy is using 2-3 alts, all crying about MCSE. It was a simple question - What MCSE have to do with the article at all, however, the guy seems very busy writting his "words of wisdom" failing to answer. And if you scroll up bit more, you'll see even more amazing posts by the same alts, totally out of everthing. Can't make the difference between 16 and 32 bits? A forum troll indeed.

Now, where you saw me defending MS or someone else here? Can you read at all?
Actually, we (my company) are working in a mixed environment and I can claim to have a good idea what is good/bad in both Linux and Windows. We're providing solutions for client on both sides and trust me, the things are not in black and white only. Both platforms have problems and both platforms have great things to offer too. Only the idiot haters are seeying the things in black and white. Oh, you're not going to work with my company! Care? Join the #care channel. P.S. And yes, my company is listed as technology parter with Microsoft, CodeGear, RedHat and Novell. Happy hating :)

Good on you MS, keep on producing second rate OS, and allow the virus writers to focus 99.999% of their effort on your bag of nails.

I live happu in the knowledge that my Mac and Ubuntu servers are 100's of times less likely to get infected

Your "Ubuntu severs"? Hahaha... another n00b joined. ROFL!!!11!!

Yes 99snowflake, I was wondering about Ozzy, I think he was experiencing a bad trip on some mind "improving" substance.

I got Windows 98 on my new computer barely 10 years ago, and it told me it was the best OS ever produced by MS.

It was full of wonderful new features that would ensure productive, safe and worry free computing.

Got the Blue Screen of Death (frequently) free.

Happy Days.

I am so sick and tired of people complaining about the speed of windows vista, if you cannot figure out how to disable your startup apps and uac, then you need to stop using computers... linux will never top windows because nobody wants to learn programing to check their e-mail. I have never seen a linux install where everything works, but windows on the other hand has gotten to be almost effortless when it comes to hardware. I'm sorry you could not get your 10 year old printer to work with vista, maybe instead of bitching about MS you should bitch about the hardware manufacturer not wanting to support their own products... it is hilarious to me now that this debate will not die, linux is a toy, when you are ready to do something besides watch youtube boot into windows.

"... because if we are honest the Linux desktop really doesn't exist other than in the minds of few die hard nerds."
ha,ha,ha
oh!yeah?
strangely for you I know lots of people classified as averages joes that try and install ubuntu ALONE and feel very satisfied with the result!
why?
because the concept to have an OS that is free,open and constantly evolved seems to be very attractive at at last!
THE MICROSOFT IS DOOMED !
You can't beat the free and open whatever the mass manipulated advertising campaigns!
We live in 2009 and the progress of linux is amazing and colossal!
As for the them that they describe us "linux jihadists"
they have the problem!
After all, it is a shame to consume time and energy only to defend a software piece of crap that presupposes vendor support,it is closed,virus-trojan-spyware-worm ridden and overpriced!

Elderlybloke = 99snowflake = missingdll = itsallover ... OMG, dude! You need 4-5 different names to pretend someone is supporting your crap? Hahah, get a life! (and a brain) :)

Yeah, because Linux is actually competing with iPhone for market share, it is soooo alive! Lets bet who will climb over 1% marked share first! :))

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9

P.S. There shuold be a new article "iPhone already killed Linux on the desktop" :)

Just because it says there is NO RAM free after loading up the Desktop doesn't mean it is using it all! You people should go and read up about how Windows now allocates and runs things in memory. It basically now uses the memory and doesn't leave it idle. So your comlaining now because it is actually doing something? gawd..
Prof of that is in the pudding, Windows 7 beta works fine on my old IBM TP T42 laptop with 512M and everything in Office 2007 is smooth along with Firefox.

Even IF Windows did see some major improvements, I do not particularly like the idea of paying as much as they want in order to run their OS. I'm fine with mine coming with Windows Vista; and after I did some major modifications, it is actually quite pleasant. That computer now is on dual-boot.

I will still stick with Ubuntu/other Linux distros for one major reason: I got very, very, VERY tired of consistently dealing with viruses. Plus, yeah, though Ubuntu looks somewhat yucky at it's baseline, but with less time it takes to finally get Vista running correctly, the system can look AS good or better than base Vista.

I personally like both, really, but PREFER Ubuntu for my uses. Free games, free programs, etc.

I hope 7 does fix many of the previous problems, but I definitely will not buy it by choice.

Is it just me, or does it seem like people have just read the title and then commented?

I wont lie it does sound like you have only been focusing on one linux desktop, but there are plenty more which are really nice. Dont get me wrong, I use XP at home and at work Vista and Linux (opensuse, ub, sles etc). I have also tried 7, every single one of them has problems, its not like one single OS is perfect

gee. "aw, aw Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop. aw, aw Linux users have always wanted to buy Windows 7 ever since it was first released". seriously, fucked up retarded excuse for a journalist, have you ever considered PROOF READING this big mistake yourself?
i mean how do you come up with the most shittiest of ideas to actually KILL Linux? have you ever wondered how much of a whore you've really become, considering i don't need to read this entire waste of shit you call an article to know that you don't know nothing about how to use a piece of hardware we people of Planet Earth call a computer and not you aliens of another universe call a device? man how much of an uninformed maniac are you?

nobody has to believe Windows 7 KILLS Linux. there is always an operating system that different PC owners prefer.
it's like a diner. there is always a good amount of different types of dishes that people might like to eat. take me for example. i have a TRIPLE boot of Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex (which i don't know what i'm using for quite frankly), Linux Mint 6 Felicia (the distro that i LOVE USING myself mind you cause not only does this have propietry software like DVD Playback it's also a derivative of Ubuntu 8.10)
and Windows XP. so yeah i enjoy using different operating systems to get the most out of my father's laotop these days. so like i said it just depends on their style and taste. noone hast to buy a particular OS just cause some alienated, sadistic and otherwise mindless fucktard like you say it's the best.

for many years Linux doesn't have to compete with (yeah i'm gonna go out on a limb here and go with you guys on this) Micro$hit to become "openly popular". yeah it maybe the highest ranking OS with the highest Distro rankings being both Ubuntu 1st and Linux Mint 2nd (at least that's how i look at it) but it does not oppose Microsoft Windows in any way, shape, form or knowledge. it's not like "aw, aw i'm gonna start buying Windows 98 (or earlier versions or Windows) cause you say it's the best". people use what people, in their hearts, love the most.

so before i leave here lemme say that your biggest fucked up excuse for a pathetically poor written article not only stinks of utter bullshit and shitty choice of wording, but it completely proves naught but your big fatty assed momma has pushed it out like a big fat piece o shit.

You guys really suck.... what a unprofessional point of view. How much does BG pay you for such comments? You'd probably sold your soul for miserable 20 bucks.

I agree, No Evidence, and really who cares.... The only ones ever comparing are WINFROZE user's anyway, always trying to substantiate their crappy OS. Get real. Linux obviously isn't "dying" or going anywhere.

Yeah right,like you know how will Windows 7 behave in future....It could be unstable just as Vista,and the thing you said striked me the most...How could you even compare win with linux,especially that win will blow away ubuntu?even if it happens,ubuntu(or other linux )will make it more superior in time,but windows will stay same for 5 or more years unchanged.Wathcing over the long race,win has lost long ago,it survived only thanking human foolishnes and buying bad OS in case of Vista,and we will see about Windows 7.

i hate all those versions. please microsoft get over it now. For God sake
come up with one version as OSX have....

here is my complete review on windows 7:

http://ibuymobile.co.uk/reviews/2009/02/14/a-quick-windows-7-review/

Imagine for a minute that Windows 7 and Ubuntu 8 are the first OS's every released. Which would gain more popularity? Kind of like Betamax v VHS, Blue-ray v HD-DVD. I've used Windows for years (since Win95), and installed Ubuntu and used it several times over the last few years. In my opinion I think that Ubuntu would be a stronger contender than it is currently, due to the fact that it uses far less resources, has free software available, and runs, in the most part, faster than Windows.

So now up to date, saying that Windows 7 will kill Linux is a bit of a leap of faith. I don't think it will do any good/bad for Ubuntu any more than vista did. There will always be the respective fan boys, and then the curious that want to see what the alternative to Windows is like.

CentOS till i die - 2009 til infinity! love that shit! it's just Red Hat with the logos taken out and some code fixed but it is bad ass for free desktops and/or free servers and/or free chasing birds, what ever you want, get it. OpenSUSE (11.0) is a good one too.

there's probably some other thweet Linuxes out there, gonna have to check out Mandriva now too, but those 2 are ma current choices. i don't like all the sudoing that Ubuntu requires, it annoys me.

Microthoft just needs to take a deep breath, release it slowly, and then wrap that shit up B. secure that shit, and stop releasing 30 versions of the same insecure, protocol violating, expensive ass OS. 2 versions tops and then bring da price down. we can't just toss them out a window that easily, but they do need to make some serious life changes and re-focus on their inner chi fo sho. i'll let them have Vista and if Windows 7 sucks (sounds like it will) they can have that too, but that's it. if they don't realize/realise (whatever) and fix they flaws after that then they are done, officially. also i miss blaming Bill Gates for Windows issues, bring him back too.

and eff MACs, eff MACs and eff they users, just kidding just kidding.

MACs are gay though.

and so is anyone that types the word yawn as if they are yawning while typing, or yawning at what they are reading or whatever. that's gayer then 2 dude making out, which is ok if you are into that sort of thing but it is one of the gayest things a person can do is all i'm saying Err.

I've been using Linux Mint for a while now and I definately love it. Compiz is the bomb. But I can't continue to enjoy it because of compatibility issues. I can't enjoy Earthbound 2 because Visual Boy keeps freezing. Get between me en me earthbound and I get angry :( Linux is awesome, but when it comes to gaming and such it is utterly destroyed. It really ticks me off because I HATE MICROSOFT. The reason I got linux is because I was about to throw my computer out the window because of windows. but, i can't give up my games. I wish WINE actually worked :(

Do not forget this... I think it happen really often!!!
"The Linux crowd were too busy talking about their superiority on the server and ignored the desktop to the OS's eventual doom. "

Im switching to linux now (Ubuntu), actually i'm dl it now ( 3 min remaining), im so tired of m$ and they really suck more than anything had sucked before.

I have used Windows and Linux for over 12 years, and have been a sys admin for both desktops and servers. Which do I choose? Linux without a doubt. Why? Because it's rock solid, secure, stable, FREE, and doesn't come all bloated like Windows Vista and Windows 7. Windows XP will soon be gone, and after that it will be interesting how people adapt to Windows. Personally, I'm not going down that path. I have chosen Fedora 10 Linux at home and also use Red Hat Linux for my personal business. It does everything I want or need, and is much easier to maintain. I don't need to worry about software activation, and all of the problems of Microsoft any longer.

a href="http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux" http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux /a

Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop????????????

Ya exactly considering the high resource utilization issue will go with the full public version & the full public version will run on only 32mb of ram or possibly even less.

Did you see how many faults you found with Windows 7 and made the decision by yourself that the issues will be resolved in the full public version.

I'm sticking to Linux.

Let's face it, Linux doesn't need killing on the desktop, as it's already dead. Apart from geeks, who get thrills from executing a script to perform a task that takes five seconds in Windows, possibly because it makes them feel better about having genitalia the size of a chipolata, nobody wants Linux.

In an enterprise, you'd be insane to deploy Linux anywhere except server rooms. The cost in man hours and training to show novices how to perform basic tasks often negates the savings of a 'free' operating system. Then when something goes wrong, there are a lot less experts to call.

It runs better on older hardware, but that makes it the poor man's choice. You could have state-of-the-art IT facilities with modern PCs running Windows 7, or Pentium IIIs running Linux.

Hell, Vista and even Windows ME are better than Linux on the desktop.

Yes, the article was pathetic but dont add more oil to the fire by initiating virtual WW3.....first i just want to correct two things above me... BSD is not linux, its completely different yet eeirly similiar.....secondly the powershell is flawed....deeply.....which is why no smart windows fan mentioned it....only a dummy above me.........bash zsh and csh work best.......and on unix........windows has a lousy kernel.......if you ever experience OS development you know what im talking about, it uses batch which has a kazillion problems, the configuration is a mess and it forces you to do everything the way it wants you to....windows is also horrible with security and their updates and patches dont do much, the customer support is terrible......the drvier support was great until the reworked kernel with the name vista.....the only plus point left is the video games since OO3 covered the office war.....windows runs most games but linux is starting to get more games too.....personally i'd just get a console to game on...its cheaper than upgrading your pc......
about user friendly-ness...windows is slightly in the disadvantage from a third person perspective....i actually conducted an expirement for this.....50 old people 40 young people ....all who have never used a computer before.......i split them half and half.....the linux (ubuntu and puppy) group picked up nearly twice as fast than the windows group......windows only seems user friendly to some people cuz thats all theyve used.......

now all those hardware upgraders : answer me this:
why would i pay lets say $200 to upgrade my harware then buy w7 for $400 to put in a fair price on it.....to get a lousy OS thats only good for games to work.......when i can get much better performance and stability and security and much more cuztomizability adn desktop effects on my current pc for free.??

Im just about neutral in the windows vs linux war......i use BSD

I used to hate M$soft, but I have to say, I have windows 7 RC1 and L.O.V.E. IT! I run a crappy IBM laptop (R61I) and it zooms, the hybrid sleep uses hardly any battery overnight, and when I open the lid, I can surf the web in less then 4 seconds (the wireless reconnect really is nice).

I used to be a linux lover, but all I want to do is check my gmail and run firefox, and I find that kubuntu took longer to come out of sleep, took longer to lanch firefox and all in all not as sexy looking.

I want to open the lid, click on a browser (IE8 really is not that bad now), and surf the web RIGHT AWAY. Linux cannot do that. PERIOD. there are delays, took over 10 seconds just for firefox to start on my vanila install.

So I am converted, I am converting my friends and neighbours.

I still would install OSX mackintosh on my laptop if the wireless card was supported, but I have given up on linux. too slow, too fugly.

Windows 7 also is only $119 USD to upgrade from Vista, or $199 for the home version, so the cost has dropped HUGE. And as I said, I am using hardware that is spec'ed for Windows XP and it boots a bit slower then XP but opens apps/internet faster then XP.

(Source amazon.com)

Dont worry Microshite will f**k it up as usual. There betas work ok but as soon as they release a version of their crap to the public every good thing in the betas are removed and it behaves just like all the previous versions. Same o same o,if they could actually make a REAL OS that was stable and did not require you to re-install because the so called os's file system cant keep it together with out corrupting itself it would be a first for them but as usual they keep trying to dumb down the os so grandma and grandpa can try to run it well the rest of us have to fight through the useless so called features to try and find any actual useful tools but alas as usual there is nothing new it still has the same old file system [no matter what they say] and its still a resource hog and has no new technology in it at all just some eye candy to try and persuade the masses that they did make it better but NO its still the same o song and dance. So save your money and go to A REAL and STABLE OS. Any version of Linux is 100 times better than anything microshite can come up with and costs a whole lot less and that is 1 thing they will never be able to do [Quit trying to steal your hard earned money for the same old Shite] I am writing this on opensuse 11.1 and watching tv on my laptop and running my openoffice and playing cards and chatting on my opensource chat program all at the same time with no slow downs or crashes. So winblows 7 is a good OS well i bet you once the masses have it on their new pc's you will see a flood of the usual complaints and of course that will be par for the course for microshaft

And Jeff is also sitting in his basement in his underwear, being fat, wearing thick glasses and wondering why he is single and smells.

If you want to be a shut in, and give a bad name for all geeks, keep flaming windows and run your little linux flavour of the month.

Take a shower, have a shave and get a grip.

yeah some of you may have been awed by this pathetically excuse of an article here (according to TrueLugia121) but i feel as if this is getting way too far here. as soon as i showed my father the Release Candidate of Windows Se7en he was keen for me to install it right away. but when i thought that this trial period expires on the first of March 2010. i thought, well, it's a umongous waste of time. so i'm thinking of switching back to my Triple boot option of XP Service Pack 3, Vista Ultimate Service Pack 1 and Linux Mint 7 Gloria. cause quite obviously, until Windows Se7en hit's the shelves this October, what's the poopin point.

Your article did very little to compare Linux (which is NOT just Ubuntu) to Windows. All you basically said is "Windows 7 does not suck as much as Vista". That doesn't reallly reveal much, does it?

Linux distro: free
OpenOffice: free
Most Linux software: free

No matter how many times to add "free" to "free" you end up with... FREE! So what risk is there in using Linux? At worst, you might be disappointed and cast it aside. At best, you might find something even better than what you're used to, at no extra cost, and even learn a thing or two about getting the most out of your computer.

With proprietary software, and Microsoft in general (Windows, MS Office, etc), you're dishing out tons of cash paying a premium for "peace of mind" and "familiarity."

No, thanks. I think I'll keep my money by using free software, and spend my earnings on things that are worth paying for, such as hardware.

Don't forget, Linux also provides, as an option, Compiz and Avant Window Navigator, which are just as good, if not better, than Apple's "Dock" and Windows Aero.

Linux Vs Windows ... again.
We're better than you ... again.

Every article that compares the two degrades into a pointless argument.

The two don't compare and never will.

Windows Kill Linux?

Kill what? or, What or who is killed?

Hi, Windows 7 just like "old" other Windows, it still has problem with security! Viruz, Viruz, Viruz...
oh la la...
that's always be heard by all Windows users, not except Windows 7 users! Everydays, every hours, every minutes, every seconds... is it enough?

Linux never be killed,

but,

look arround you guys! in fact that all MS Windows just always be killed by the "VIRUZES". Ha!

No Posix, no party.

Where Windows will go without a REAL standard? Norton and Kaspersky are happy.

Microsoft never has produced consistently stable and low resource usage operating systems.

I loaded SuSE Linux 11.1 on my desktop SATA RAID running two 500 GB drives with 4 GB of RAM. The shutdown time is about 3 minutes, compared to about 25 seconds with Linux.

I still will continue to support Windows, but I am switching to Linux because it is a streamlined operating system that does everything that you need it to do.

Sorry to dwell on one thing you said, but it is so customisable, that you can make it look and act pretty much any way you can imagine. You can arrange the menus how you like, you can have any visual effects there has ever been from OSX or Windows, plus many way cooler ones. Are you aware of this? If you forgot what a decent graphical interface looks like while you were using Ubuntu, it's your own fault.